To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

Logistics capacity study of the Guaymas-Tucson Corridor: A Report to the Arizona Department of Transportation

Logistics capacity study of the Guaymas-Tucson Corridor: A report to the Arizona Department of Transportation

A Report to the Arizona Department of Transportation
Logistics Capacity Study of the
Guaymas- Tucson Corridor
J. RenÃ Villalobos, Arnold Maltz*, Omar Ahumada, Gerardo
TreviÃ±o, Octavio SÃ¡nchez, Hugo C. GarcÃ a
Department of Industrial Engineering
Ira A. Fulton School of Engineering
* Department of Supply Chain
WP Carey School of Business
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 1
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................... 1
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... ..... 3
List of Tables......................................................................................................................... ............. 5
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ 6
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 9
2 Refinement of Tasks ................................................................................................................ 11
3 Documentation of Previous Studies Related with the Corridor.............................................. 12
3.1 Summary of Literature Review....................................................................................... 14
4 Establishing a Baseline of Cargo for the Container Terminal ................................................ 15
4.1 Summary of Baseline Analysis....................................................................................... 22
5 Analysis of the Port of Guaymas............................................................................................. 23
5.1 Inventory of the Current Infrastructure........................................................................... 23
5.2 The Simulation Model..................................................................................................... 26
5.3 Summary of the Infrastructure of the Port of Guaymas................................................. 35
6 Analysis of the Mariposa Port of Entry................................................................................... 36
6.1 Summary of the Analysis................................................................................................ 43
7 Analysis of Highway Infrastructure Supporting the Port of Guaymas................................... 44
7.1 Summary of Highway Capacity...................................................................................... 49
8 Analysis of Railroad Infrastructure Supporting the Port ........................................................ 50
8.1 Summary of Railroad Capacity Analysis ....................................................................... 57
9 Overall Corridor Analysis........................................................................................................ 58
9.1 Current Capacity and Utilization of the Corridor........................................................... 59
9.2 Utilization of the Corridor with a Terminal Container at Guaymas.............................. 62
9.3 Complementary Analysis................................................................................................ 65
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 2
9.4 Summary of Findings...................................................................................................... 66
10 Recommended Activities ......................................................................................................... 69
10.1 Refinement of the Capacity Study.................................................................................. 69
10.2 Identification of Infrastructure Improvements and their Effects ................................... 69
10.3 Identification of Comparative Logistics/ Supply Chain Advantages of the Use of the
Port of Guaymas ........................................................................................................................... 70
10.4 Determination of Potential Commercial of the Corridor ............................................... 70
10.5 Matching the Logistics Advantages with Appropriate Industry Segments ................... 70
10.6 Exploration of Opportunities of Collaboration for Value Added Activities in the Port
of Guaymas........................................................................................................................ .......... 70
10.7 Preparation of a Strategic Road Map for the Development of the Corridor.................. 71
11 References ............................................................................................................................... 72
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 3
List of Figures
Figure 4.1 â€“ Maritime Routes........................................................................................................... 19
Figure 4.2 â€“ Origin of Containers..................................................................................................... 20
Figure 4.3 â€“ Destination of Containers ............................................................................................ 20
Figure 4.4 â€“ International Origin of Containers............................................................................... 21
Figure 5.1â€“ Master Plan of the Port of Guaymas............................................................................. 24
Figure 5.2 â€“ Handling Equipment at the Port of Guaymas.............................................................. 26
Figure 5.3 â€“ Distribution of Maximum Draft................................................................................... 26
Figure 5.4 â€“ Screen of the Simulation Program............................................................................... 28
Figure 5.5 â€“ Vessel Turnaround Time.............................................................................................. 32
Figure 5.6 â€“ Vessel Turnaround Time.............................................................................................. 32
Figure 5.7 â€“ Container Time in System ........................................................................................... 34
Figure 5.8 â€“ Container Time in System ........................................................................................... 34
Figure 6.1 â€“ Mariposa POE Simulation Input.................................................................................. 36
Figure 6.2 â€“ Mariposa POE Simulation Process Map ..................................................................... 37
Figure 6.3 â€“ Graphical Interface of the Simulation Program for the Mariposa POE...................... 38
Figure 6.4 â€“ Average Truck Time in System................................................................................... 41
Figure 6.5 â€“ Average Trucks Time in System per Scenario............................................................ 41
Figure 6.6 â€“ Required Operational Hours to Clear Compound ....................................................... 42
Figure 7.1 â€“ GIS Map of the Corridor under Study......................................................................... 44
Figure 7.2 â€“ Highway Capacity in Arizona...................................................................................... 46
Figure 7.3 â€“ Highway Capacity in Sonora ....................................................................................... 47
Figure 7.4 â€“ Mexican Highway Inspection ...................................................................................... 47
Figure 8.1 â€“ Utilization of the Ferromexâ€™s Tracks........................................................................... 51
Figure 8.2 â€“ Utilization of UPâ€™s Tracks ........................................................................................... 53
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 4
Figure 8.3 â€“ Northbound Rail Crossings at the Border ( Provided by Ferromex, 2005)................. 55
Figure 8.4 â€“ Southbound Rail Crossings at the Border ( Provided by Ferromex, 2005)................. 55
Figure 9.1 â€“ Rail- Truck Intermodal Traffic in the United States: 1980- 2004 ................................ 66
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 5
List of Tables
Table 4.1 â€“ Comparison of the Three Ports ..................................................................................... 16
Table 4.2 â€“ Comparison of the Three Ports in Terms of Equipment............................................... 17
Table 4.3 â€“ Distances and Time from Guaymas.............................................................................. 18
Table 5.1 â€“ Berths Dimensions......................................................................................................... 24
Table 5.2 â€“ Relevant Information Summary.................................................................................... 25
Table 5.3 â€“ Infrastructure between the Current State and the Simulated Scenarios ....................... 27
Table 5.4 â€“ Scenarios Analyzed for the Operation of the Port of Guaymas ................................... 30
Table 5.5 â€“ Results for the Scenarios Analyzed for the Operation of the Port ............................... 31
Table 6.1 â€“ Information Used for Each Scenario for the Mariposa POE........................................ 39
Table 6.2 â€“ Results of Running the Simulation of the POE ............................................................ 40
Table 7.1 â€“ Capacity Estimates for the different nodes in PCPH.................................................... 48
Table 8.1 â€“ Capacity Estimates for Different Segments of the Railroad ( Trains per Day) ............ 52
Table 8.2 â€“ Specifications for Overpasses ....................................................................................... 57
Table 8.3 â€“ Translation of the Specifications for the Overpasses ( in feet) ..................................... 57
Table 9.1 â€“ Estimation of Capacity and Utilization of Railroads.................................................... 60
Table 9.2 â€“ Estimation of Capacity and Utilization of Highways................................................... 60
Table 9.3 â€“ Estimation of Capacity and Utilization of Highways................................................... 61
Table 9.4 â€“ Current and Available Daily Capacity of the Overall Corridor ................................... 62
Table 9.5 â€“ Capacity and Utilization with a Container Terminal in Guaymas ............................... 63
Table 9.6 â€“ Capacity and Utilization with Terminal in Guaymas ................................................... 63
Table 9.7 â€“ Average Transit Times by Truck .................................................................................. 64
Table 9.8 â€“ Average Transit Times by Railroad .............................................................................. 65
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 6
Executive Summary
This document provides the final report of the activities performed under the project Logistics
Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor sponsored by the Arizona Department of
Transportation ( ADOT) under Grant JPA 06- 001T. Some of the findings in this document
include:
â€¢ From an infrastructure perspective, we believe that the Port of Guaymas, with some
minor improvements, such as the acquisition of additional container- moving equipment,
is ready to start a container service comparable to other Mexican regional ports, such as
the Port of Mazatlan and Ensenada.
â€¢ However, the main limitation of the port capacity is the current unavailability of quay
cranes. This precludes the Port of Guaymas from being able to offer efficient turnaround
services to modern container ships that are not geared with their own cranes. This
constraint may limit the potential of the Port of Guaymas to serve as an efficient gateway
port for container service beyond the local region. In order to provide this service we
believe that at least two quay cranes are needed, since just one quay crane would not
provide enough capacity to make the loading and unloading of containers from the
vessels more expedient. The exact capacity and characteristics of the quay cranes and
related issues, such as the need for reinforcement of the piloting system of the port is
beyond the scope of this study.
â€¢ We estimate that the current main bottlenecks of the physical infrastructure of the
corridor, in order of their impact, are: Mariposa Port of Entry ( POE), the railroad
inspection procedures at the US side of the border and the Port of Guaymas. These
points need to be further studied to verify our findings and to recommend potential
improvements if an increase of the current capacity of the Corridor is desired.
â€¢ We estimate the current capacity of the Guaymas- Tucson multimodal corridor to be
175,000 TEU ( twenty- foot equivalent units) per year if both, Mariposa and DeConcini,
ports of entry are operational, and a railroad container service between Guaymas and
Tucson is available. However, this capacity is reduced to 104,000 TEU per year if a
railroad service is not available. On the other hand, the current capacity for the corridor
would be of 120,000 TEU per year, if only rail is used to move the containers from
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 7
Guaymas to Tucson. In this case, the main factor limiting the capacity of the Corridor
would be the train inspection procedures performed at the DeConcini Port of Entry and/ or
Rio Rico facilities.
â€¢ After getting historical data of the usage of the railroad tracks, physically inspecting and
analyzing the specifications of the overpasses for the Empalme- Hermosillo railroad
segment we could not find any physical obstacle to the operation of double stacked
container trains from Guaymas to Tucson.
â€¢ A major obstacle for the viable operation of the Guaymas- Arizona container service is
the lack of a provider of an integrated service that includes shipping lines, railroads and
freight forwarding services. In order to make possible this integrated service it is first
necessary to have an integrated railroad service for containers between Guaymas and
Arizona. In this regard, we were unable to get precise information from the US rail
company providing the service, i. e. Union Pacific, on what are the necessary or sufficient
conditions â€“ commercial or operational; to service the potential containers generated by
the Port of Guaymas. We believe that the railroad companies are indispensable for the
creation of an economically feasible container corridor between the Port of Guaymas and
Arizona. Thus, these companies must be encouraged to take an active role in the
activation of a container service in the Corridor.
â€¢ Input from United States ( US) rail and truck managers suggest that process changes to
make border crossing times more predictable would be very useful in facilitating efficient
services to and from Guaymas.
â€¢ We believe that even if container traffic were attracted to the port, US railroads would
primarily be interested in Midwest- East destined freight, while Ferromex is willing to
handle shorter haul business.
â€¢ In our analysis, we have made assumptions about the type of infrastructure and level of
service needed to attract a shipping line to establish a port of call by a major container
shipping line. However, the exact needs in terms of service and demand should be
explored with the shipping companies. This assignment is left as part of the proposed
second phase of this study.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 8
â€¢ An issue that needs to be addressed as soon as possible is the lack of a regularly
scheduled container service to the Port of Guaymas. While the analysis of the
requirements to attract a major shipping line to the port was beyond the scope this study,
we believe that the geographical position of Guaymas may be an issue to attract, in the
short term, a company to provide direct service to Asia. However, we believe that the
Port of Guaymas is well positioned to serve as a regional port. For instance, it may be
appropriate for Guaymas to concentrate initially on operating as a feeder port for Sonora
destined business until regular longer- haul business is instituted by the steamship lines
and efficient rail service for containers is secured.
â€¢ From the review of previous studies we found nineteen reports related, directly or
indirectly, to the Corridor. The main emphasis of these studies is on the infrastructure
issues on the border ports of entry and between Nogales, AZ and Tucson; as well as
current and potential congestion on the highway Interstate 10 ( I- 10). However, we did not
find any study that directly documented the overall capacity or the competitiveness of the
Guaymas- Tucson Corridor.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 9
1 Introduction
This report documents the findings of the activities performed under ADOT Grant ( JPA 06-
001T). The description of the study is included as Appendix A of this report. The overall
proposed study was divided into two phases. The objectives of these phases can be summarized
as follows:
â€¢ Phase I
o Make an inventory and summarize the available relevant studies that have been
performed on the corridor.
o Perform a quick operational assessment of the current capability of the Guaymas-
Tucson corridor, in terms of Twenty- Foot Equivalent Units ( TEU) that the
corridor can currently handle.
o Provide preliminary recommendations for future investments, by identifying
current and potential bottlenecks of the corridor, the projects required for solving
those bottlenecks and the priority of those projects based on the overall benefits
for the corridor.
o Provide comments on the general feasibility of the Arizona- Guaymas corridor.
â€¢ Phase II
o Expand the study to include prescriptive recommendations in terms of logistics
and security practices for the port, which will allow it to become globally
competitive as a small container port.
o Identify how the Port of Guaymas can serve as a strategic point of collaboration
between Arizona and Sonora. The benefits of this collaboration might include an
increase in the competitiveness of the corridor and attracting higher value added
operations to the region.
This report covers the activities performed for Phase I which is the only part funded by Arizona
Department of Transportation ( ADOT); and it covers the period from August 1, 2005 to April 15,
2006.
According to the approved statement of work, the tasks to be conducted as part of Phase I
included the following:
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 10
1. Identification, assessment, and classification of previous studies dealing with the
corridor.
2. Refinement of tasks to be performed in Phase I.
3. Documentation of current conditions of the Port of Guaymas.
4. Identification of the major infrastructure components of the transportation network
between the Port of Guaymas and Tucson.
5. Documentation of the capacity of each of the infrastructure components.
6. Determination of a baseline cargo scenario for the container terminal.
7. Determination of expected transit times between the cities of Guaymas and Tucson.
8. Identification of the bottlenecks and potential improvements in the Corridorsâ€™ railroad
and highway.
9. Preparation of scope of work for Phase II.
In the rest of this report we provide a brief summary of the activities performed to accomplish
these tasks.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 11
2 Refinement of Tasks
The proposed initial tasks to conduct the Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson
Corridor were presented to the Technical Advisory Committee ( TAC) in the inter- plenary
meeting of September 30, 2005. Based on feedback from the TAC members these tasks were
approved in the TAC meeting that took place on November 22, 2005, at Arizona State University
( ASU).
After the objectives were approved by the TAC we developed a set of detailed activities required
to complete the scope of work for the project. These activities were:
â€¢ Documentation of previous studies related with the corridor.
â€¢ Establishing a baseline of cargo for the container terminal.
â€¢ Analysis of the current infrastructure of the Port of Guaymas.
â€¢ Analysis of capacity and demand at the Nogales Port of Entry.
â€¢ Review of highway infrastructure along the Corridor.
â€¢ Review of railroad infrastructure along the Corridor.
â€¢ Overall Corridor analysis.
â€¢ Definition of scope of work of future activities.
The remainder of this report is organized according to these activities.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 12
3 Documentation of Previous Studies Related with the Corridor
The main purpose of this activity was to identify the previous studies having a direct or indirect
relation with the Sonora- Arizona corridor so that no redundant work would be done. In order to
document and analyze the previous studies dealing with the corridor we did the following:
1. Identification of related previous projects with the help of ADOT in USA and SecretarÃ a
de Comunicaciones y Transportes ( SCT) in Mexico.
2. Reading the projects and develop a matrix that includes the documents researched and
their relevant contributions to the current project.
3. Developing a summary of the findings from the past projects.
4. Identification of those areas that have not been covered by previous projects.
5. Incorporation, if feasible, of the identified areas into the current project.
As an initial activity of the Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor, previous
studies were identified, gathered, and summarized. The studies were identified through literature
search using citation indices and internet tools, from recommendations from the TAC members,
from people with experience in the region, and from citations from the studies themselves. The
following is the list of the studies reviewed:
1. Latin American Trade and Transportation Study ( 1997).
2. Arizona Port Efficiency Study ( 1997).
3. Impacts of Transportation and Education Policy on Trade and Development in the
Arizona- Sonora Region ( 1998).
4. Arizona Trade Corridor Study ( 1999).
5. Arizona Rail Plan ( 2000).
6. US- Mexico Border: Better Planning, Coordination Needed to Handle Growing
Commercial Traffic ( 2000).
7. Intelligent Transportation Systems at International Borders ( 2001).
8. The CANAMEX Corridor Coalition ( 2001).
9. Arizonaâ€™s Border Issues ( 2002).
10. Nogales International Airport Master Plan ( 2002).
11. Nogales CyberPort Project: Comprehensive Report ( 2003).
12. Arizonaâ€™s Global Gateway ( 2003).
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 13
13. The National I- 10 Freight Corridor Study ( 2003).
14. Transportation/ Logistics Research Project: Trade Flow Study ( 2004).
15. Move Arizona ( 2004).
16. Guaymas Master Development Plan ( 2005).
17. Mariposa US Port of Entry Feasibility Study ( 2005).
18. Nogales Railroad Assessment Study ( 2005).
19. Container Port Capacity Survey ( 2005).
One of the tasks included in the Phase I, was to compile a summary of the previous studies ( see
Appendix B â€“ Study Master List). The project team elected to summarize previous findings using
two instruments:
â€¢ An Excel matrix.
â€¢ A written summary of the previous studies.
These two instruments are described next:
An Excel matrix was prepared with the various studies across the top, and relevant information
possibilities in the first vertical column. The Excel matrix ( Appendix C) has four separate sheets
â€“ Actual Flows, Forecast Flows, Process, and Infrastructure â€“ and the different sheets may
reference different information. If a particular study contained relevant information, the date of
the information is indicated. For example, the Cyberport Study was completed in 2003, so the
actual flow data is labeled 1994- 2002. Note that the dates generally refer to the underlying data,
rather than the publication date of the specific study. If date ranges are noted, the study includes
historical data and/ or forecasts for multiple years.
A summary of each study was prepared that describes the main elements of the document and
indicates the findings that seem to be relevant to this project. Where appropriate, tables of
contents and lists of tables have been copied from the studies for the convenience of the user of
this report. It is suggested that readers first look at the matrix to see which studies may contain
relevant data, and then go either to the study summaries or the studies themselves to find specific
flows, process descriptions, or infrastructure descriptions and suggestions. The written summary
is included as Appendix B of this report.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 14
3.1 Summary of Literature Review
Nineteen studies having a direct or indirect relation to demand and capabilities of the Port of
Guaymas were reviewed, as well as studies of the logistics network which includes the city of
Guaymas. These studies document the lack of growth since 1998 at the Nogales, AZ gateway
which is the entry point for United States destination traffic unloaded at Guaymas. Only one
study directly examined the Port of Guaymas time and cost competitiveness with Californiaâ€™s
Port of Long Beach, but several of the studies document the need for improvements to the border
crossing process at Nogales, both rail and truck. A number of the studies detail the infrastructure
between Nogales, AZ and Tucson, AZ; as well as current and potential congestion on I- 10. The
studies show that while there is substantial North- South traffic between Sonora and Arizona, the
East- West volume through Arizona is larger at this time.
Finally, we did not find any study that documented the competitiveness of the Guaymas- Arizona
corridor from the perspective of overall logistics costs nor its overall capacity.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 15
4 Establishing a Baseline of Cargo for the Container Terminal
Since the Port of Guaymas does not currently have a scheduled container service from any steam
shipping line we had to establish a hypothetical minimum number of containers upon which to
base the overall analysis of the corridor. In order to establish this baseline the following activities
were planned:
1. Deciding the minimum demand of TEU necessary to schedule a regular stop at the port.
2. Determining a most likely and an optimistic scenario of TEU demand once the Port of
Guaymas starts receiving container traffic.
3. Researching the preliminary requirements necessary ( in TEU) to attract a container
service company, schedule a stop at the Port of Guaymas.
Regarding activity 3, it was preliminarily established that a weekly demand of 400 TEU would
provide the minimum number of containers to be attractive for a shipping company to make a
regular stop in the Port of Guaymas. At the same time this number of TEU represents the
equivalent of a weekly unit train from the Port of Guaymas to Tucson. We believe that the
potential use of a unit container train would help to make the project attractive for Union Pacific
( UP) and Ferromex. In addition, 400 TEU per week is also comparable to the current level of
business that some shipping companies currently have in other Mexican ports. In this regard, the
Ports of Ensenada and Mazatlan were used as direct benchmark references for the potential
container business of Port of Guaymas.
The Port of Mazatlan provides a good baseline to analyze Guaymas from the perspective of the
current level of port infrastructure. It also provides a good reference point as a regional Mexican
port that aims at servicing the local needs and still be attractive enough for international shipping
liners to make a regularly scheduled stop in this port. The Port of Mazatlan does not currently
have what would be considered a full fledged container terminal â€“ i. e., it lacks the quay, sea- to-shore,
cranes needed to provide efficient service to the newer container ships. Instead, it bases its
service on the availability of container ships geared with their own cranes to unload the
containers to the port. According to official SCT data ( Direccion General de Puertos, 2005), in
the year 2004 the Port of Mazatlan handled a load of containers equivalent to 15,954 TEU â€“ cargo
roughly equivalent to 320 TEU per week. This level of business is high enough to make it
attractive for new shipping companies to establish regularly scheduled container service to the
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 16
port. For instance, CP Ships has recently restarted its service to Mazatlan with two ships: TMM
Hidalgo and Lykes Racer. Each ship has an approximate capacity of 1,700 TEU ( Administracion
Portuaria Integral de Mazatlan, 2005).
In our view, the Port of Ensenada represents what the Port of Guaymas should aim to pursue in
the short to mid term time horizon. The Port of Ensenada has a fully functional container terminal
with four quay cranes. Based on conversations with personnel of Ensenada ( Jauregui, 2005) we
estimated that the different shipping companies providing container service to this port handle an
average of 300 TEU per week. According to official SCT data ( Direccion General de Puertos,
2005) the Port of Ensenada processed 39,202 TEU in 2004 and was expected to process over
65,000 TEU in 2005. This is roughly equivalent to 784 and 1,300 TEU per week respectively.
Table 4.1 and Table 4.2 provide a quick comparison of the three ports in terms of navigational
and docking facilities ( Administracion Portuaria Integral de Mazatlan ( 2005), Administracion
Portuaria Integral de Guaymas ( 2005b) and Administracion Portuaria Integral de Ensenada
( 2005)).
Table 4.1 â€“ Comparison of the Three Ports
Description Guaymas Mazatlan Ensenada
Approach Channel Depth ( mts) 12.3 12 12
Number Container Berths 3* 4** 2
Length, Depth of Berth 1 ( mts) 177, 11 160.25, 8.5 ( draft) 182.3, 10
Length, Depth of Berth 2 ( mts) 200, 11 165.45, 10 ( draft) 300, 15
Length, Depth of Berth 3 ( mts) 177, 11 356.12, 10.5 ( draft) --
Length, Depth of Berth 4 ( mts) -- 144.2, 10.0 ( draft) --
* The Port has currently 6 positions, 3 have been identified for container operations but will become 2 per the Master Plan
** These are general cargo docks
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 17
From the previous tables, the main differences between the ports are the equipment and the
dimensions of the docking facilities. For instance, the Port of Ensenada has the advantage of
having four sea- to- shore quay cranes and a depth of 15 meters in one of the docks. However, the
access channel has a depth of 12 meters which limits the capacity of the vessels that the port can
receive. A major shortcoming of the Port of Ensenada is that it is not serviced by rail. Thus, all
the incoming containers leave the Port by truck. This is not a major shortcoming for the current
operations of the port since, from our conversations with the personnel of the Port of Ensenada
( Jauregui, 2005), most of the cargo passing through Ensenada has as its main origin or destination
the closeby City of Tijuana, in particular the maquiladora industry of Tijuana. Currently, only a
very small portion of the containers cross the border into the United States. Thus, the main driver
behind the growth of cargo being handled in Ensenada has been the regional economy. In fact,
the operator of the container terminal is using a marketing strategy focusing on the maquiladora
industry, its high productivity and reliability ( Jauregui, 2005). However, the Port of Ensenada
has been able to capture some of the container cargo originating in Sonora and destined to the Far
East.
The conclusion that we can draw from the previous discussion is that, apart from the availability
of the quay cranes, the three ports are not very different from each other in terms of port
infrastructure. The Mazatlan and Ensenada ports have been able to base their operations on the
cargo generated by the regional economy and have not only been able to survive, but also, in the
case of Ensenada, experience high levels of growth ( Direccion General de Puertos, 2004). The
question that needs to be asked is whether the regional economy of Sonora can support the
Table 4.2 â€“ Comparison of the Three Ports in Terms of Equipment
Description Capacity Guaymas Mazatlan Ensenada
Container Quay Cranes -- 0 0 4
Container Yard Crane 35 Tons 1 -- --
Container Yard Crane 40 Tons 1 -- 2
Forklifts ( all) > 45,000 lbs -- 3 4
Forklifts 35,000 lbs -- 1 --
Forklifts 30,000 lbs -- 3 --
Forklifts 20,000 lbs -- 1 --
Forklifts 15,000 lbs 6 -- 4
Forklifts < 8,000 lbs 16 -- 13
Crane 20 Tons 1 -- 3
Spreaders > 45,000 lbs 0 3 --
Chassis 20 Tons 5 7 --
Chassis 40 Tons 2 -- --
Trucks -- 3 7 8
Container Shuttle ( hustlers) -- 5 14 --
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 18
operations of a regularly scheduled container service. While in this phase of the study we do not
attempt to answer this question specifically, based on the level of development of the regions of
influence of the ports of Ensenada and Mazatlan, we operate under the assumption that the
answer to this question is affirmative and what remains to be determined is the level of cargo that
would be sufficient to entice a steam shipping line to start a regular container service to Guaymas.
We assumed that this level ( 400 TEU per week) should be higher than the current levels of cargo
handled in either Mazatlan or Ensenada by the average shipping company. This assumption was
supported from information provided by the shipping lines to Jose Luis Iberri, Director of the Port
of Guaymas ( Iberri, 2005). The reason for this assumption is that stopping in Guaymas represents
a significant deviation from the current regularly scheduled maritime routes for container service.
Table 4.3 provides the distances and navigation time from Guaymas and other ports of interest.
One of the important points to consider is what maritime routes to target to entice to stop in
Guaymas. Some of the most common maritime routes servicing the West coast of Mexico are
depicted in Figure 4.1 taken from the web site of the Port of Ensenada
( http:// www. puertoensenada. com. mx/ principales_ rutas. html).
Table 4.3 â€“ Distances and Time from Guaymas
Distance ( Nautical Miles)
Port Long Beach Ensenada Mazatlan Manzanillo Guaymas
Long Beach 0 139 1006 1206 1150
Ensenada 139 0 893 1069 1026
Mazatlan 1006 893 0 293 385
Manzanillo 1206 1069 293 0 656
Guaymas 1150 1026 385 656 0
Time ( Hours)
Port Long Beach Ensenada Mazatlan Manzanillo Guaymas
Long Beach -- 6 â€“ 10 41 -- 68 49 â€“ 81 46 â€“ 77
Ensenada 6 -- 10 -- 36 -- 60 43 â€“ 72 42 â€“ 69
Mazatlan 41 -- 68 36 â€“ 60 -- 12 â€“ 20 16 â€“ 26
Manzanillo 49 -- 81 43 â€“ 72 12 -- 20 -- 27 â€“ 44
Guaymas 46 -- 77 42 â€“ 69 16 -- 26 27 â€“ 44 --
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 19
Notice that a common practice is to
service the ports of Manzanillo and
Ensenada using the same route
( Figure 4.1). If a shipping company
were to include Guaymas in this route,
between calls to Manzanillo and
Ensenada, this would represent a
deviation of about 613 nautical miles,
or between 26 and 41 hours of
additional navigational time,
depending on the speed of the vessel.
Thus, it is significantly different if, for
instance, Mazatlan were to be
included in a scheduled route, since it
would imply only 117 additional
nautical miles or between 5 and 8
hours of navigation. Consequently,
the cargo necessary to justify a stop in
Guaymas should be higher than that
available in Mazatlan.
Currently there are two shipping lines servicing the Port of Mazatlan: Mediterranean Shipping
Company ( MSC) and CP Ships. Based on information provided by Mexicoâ€™s SCT
( Administracion Portuaria Integral de Mazatlan, 2005) we estimated that the number of TEU for
the year 2005 was slightly below 20,000. This is roughly equivalent to 400 TEU per week and
133 TEU per week per company. We also note the origin of the traffic through Mazatlan.
According to official SCT data for 2004 Sonora generates about 40% of all the cargo that is
exported in containers and about 11% of all the cargo that is imported in containers through the
Port of Mazatlan ( Direccion General de Puertos, 2005). Using these figures we estimate that
around 2,500 of the containers handled by the port of Mazatlan in the year 2004 were generated
by the state of Sonora. Since at the time of the analysis the information for 2005 was not
available, we used the projection of growth of the container traffic for 2005 which was about 35%
over 2004 to estimate this number of containers as 3,300 for 2005. Figure 4.2 and Figure 4.3
Figure 4.1 â€“ Maritime Routes
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 20
show the origin and destination ( in percentage) of the containerized cargo moving through the
Port of Mazatlan. The countries of origin for the containers moved through Mazatlan are shown
in Figure 4.4.
Destination of Contanarized Exports in Tons
USA, 9836,
12%
Algeria ,
14483,
17%
Spain,
27585,
32%
Italy, 6927,
8%
France,
3329, 4%
Korea,
2430, 3%
Portugal,
2618, 3%
Other,
18234,
21%
Figure 4.2 â€“ Origin of Containers
Destination of Contanarized Imports in Tons
Sinaloa,
10666,
14%
Sonora,
8640, 11%
Nuevo
Leon, 4267,
6%
Mexico
City, 1003,
1%
Other,
2216, 3%
Durango,
37897,
49%
Mexico
State,
12076,
16%
Figure 4.3 â€“ Destination of Containers
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 21
Origin of Contanarized Imports in Tons
Chile
77%
USA
6%
Spain
4%
Brazil
6%
Other
7%
Figure 4.4 â€“ International Origin of Containers
In terms of the Port of Ensenada, from our conversation with this portâ€™s personnel ( Jauregui,
2005), we estimate that the current average TEU per week moved per steam shipping company is
below 300. According to the official data provided by the SCT for 2004 ( Direccion General de
Puertos, 2005) all the containerized cargo being imported through Ensenada has as its final
destination the state of Baja California and 100% of the containerized cargo being exported from
Ensenada has its origin in the states of Baja California and Sonora. From the products listed as
exported in this data it is clear that Sonora is an important contributor to the cargo exported
through Ensenada. A rough estimate would be that at least 10% of the containers exported from
Ensenada have de State of Sonora as their origin. If we use this percentage and an approximation
of 30,000 containers exported in the year 2005, we come to an estimate of around 3,000
containers per year originating in the state of Sonora.
Also, we assumed that the minimum number of containers needed to start a scheduled container
service to Guaymas should be higher than that for Ensenada, hence the estimate of 400 TEU per
week. This would be consistent with a baseline for a regional port. From the data above we
believe that currently there are at least 160 TEU per week from Sonora that are moving through
the Ports of Mazatlan and Ensenada. This number of containers is higher than our estimate of the
average number of container per company being handled at the Port of Mazatlan for the year
2005. We anticipate that two of the goals to be recommended for the second phase of this project
include the refinement of the estimates of the TEU generated by the zone of influence of the Port
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 22
of Guaymas and discussing with the shipping lines their particular expectations and requirements
to establish a regular service to and from Guaymas.
From the perspective of the railroad analysis 400 TEU represent approximately 230 containers,
the mix of these containers would be 170 containers of 40â€™ and 60 containers of 20â€™ ( this is
equivalent to a 74- 26% container mix, or a 85- 15% TEU mix), which in turn would require a
single train with around 100 well cars to transport these containers from Guaymas ( Empalme) to
Tucson. We assumed that each car has an average length of 65â€™ so a full unit- train of 100 cars,
plus 2- 3 locomotives at around 210 feet, would have a total length of around 6,710 feet, which is
a suitable length according to the current specifications of the trains operating on the corridor.
This last result is assuming a mix of 33% single cars 33% three- car modules and 33% five- car
modules. Therefore, the proposed baseline also corresponds to what we considered an efficient
rail transportation strategy. Another observation that needs to be made is that in our proposed
analysis we assume for the different scenarios that the all containers received in Guaymas would
be exported to the United States.
We established a â€œ most likelyâ€ scenario for Guaymas, after regular service is established, as
roughly the same level as the number of containers being currently handled by the Port of
Ensenada, or 1,200 TEU per week. In this scenario the assumption is that there are several
container liners with scheduled stops at the Port of Guaymas. We believe that this scenario
would be more in line with the port of Guaymas being used as a container gateway to the United
States.
4.1 Summary of Baseline Analysis
We established a baseline for the analysis of the capacity of the corridor of 400 TEU per week. A
second expanded baseline of 1,200 TEU per week was also established. The first scenario would
represent in our estimation the most likely scenario at the start of a container service in the Port of
Guaymas. The second scenario would represent expanded containers with more than one steam
shipping line servicing the Port. These scenarios were set as a starting point to the capacity
analysis and not as a feasibility study to attract a steam shipping line to establish a regular stop in
the Port of Guaymas. Addressing this feasibility is beyond the scope of our research and is left as
a logical next step in the analysis.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 23
5 Analysis of the Port of Guaymas
Since the Port of Guaymas is an essential component of the Corridor it was the first element
analyzed. The analysis consisted of the following activities:
1. Making an inventory of the current infrastructure.
2. Determining the current and maximum capacity ( in TEU) of the infrastructure.
3. Identifying the services offered in the port.
4. Documenting the process map of the proposed container operations at the port.
5. Developing a simulation model to determine the capacity of the Port in terms of TEU.
6. Identifying the constraints of the Portâ€™s capacity.
Activities 1, 3 and 4 were accomplished through interviews with the Port personnel and other
interested parties during visits that the research team made to the Port of Guaymas. A list of the
visits and meetings is offered in Appendix G. These visits served to prepare the process maps
which are included in Appendix D. These maps were used for the different analyses reported in
this document. In this section of the report we first describe the current infrastructure of the port;
we then make general comments on this infrastructure and the baseline infrastructure used for the
analysis of the Port of Guaymas; afterwards, we broadly describe the simulation and the different
scenarios used for the simulation analysis. Finally, we present the simulation analysis and
conclude with a summary of the recommendations regarding the port infrastructure. Each one of
these activities is briefly described next.
5.1 Inventory of the Current Infrastructure
We used four different sources of information to establish the current infrastructure of the port:
direct visits to the port, information provided by the Master Plan of the Port of Guaymas ( Figure
5.1), interviews with the port personnel and information available through the web site of the port
( Administracion Portuaria Integral de Guaymas, 2005 and 2005b). We focused our attention to
the infrastructure available in the port to set up a container terminal operation.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 24
The Port of Guaymas currently has six berths in the general dock area. These positions are
depicted in Figure 5.1. The dimensions in meters of the different berths are shown in Table 5.1.
The Port has identified berths 2, 3 and 4 to start the
container operations. The Master Plan for the port
calls for consolidating berths 2, 3 and 4 into two
with a depth of 11 meters and a length of 288.5
meters each. Hence, the analysis of the capacity is
based on the existence of these two berths. This
implies dredging under berths 2 and 3 to get the
targeted depth. A question that may be asked is whether this depth is enough to allow the
operation of a container service. In order to answer this question we looked at the depth of
similar ports. In particular, we use as points of comparison the ports of Mazatlan and Ensenada.
This information was presented in Table 4.1. From this table we can see that the Port of
Guaymas has deeper docking positions than the Port of Mazatlan and it has slightly shallower
positions than the main docking position of the Port of Ensenada.
Figure 5.1â€“ Master Plan of the Port of Guaymas
Table 5.1 â€“ Berths Dimensions
Berth Length ( mts) Depth ( mts)
1 297 3
2 200 10
3 177 10
4 200 11
5 175 13
6 175 13
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 25
We also looked at the infrastructure available in a port that is serviced by the major container
shipping lines such as the ports of Manzanillo and Colombo ( Sri Lanka). Relevant information
for these ports is summarized in Table 5.2. This information was taken from the web site of the
Port of Manzanillo ( Administracion Portuaria Integral de Manzanillo, 2005) and from the
publication of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development ( Galhena, 2003):
â€œ Container Terminal Development and Management: The Sri Lanka Experience ( 1980- 2002)â€.
The information for Guaymas is based on the assumptions previously stated. The Port of
Manzanillo handled over 800,000 TEU in the year 2004 and the Port of Colombo over 1,700,000
in the year 2002.
Table 5.2 â€“ Relevant Information Summary
Description Guaymas Manzanillo Colombo
Approach Channel Depth ( mts) 12 16 15
Number Container Berths 2 2 4
Length and Depth of Berth 1 ( mts) 289, 11 250, 14 300, 12
Length and Depth of Berth 2 ( mts) 289, 11 250, 14 332, 13
Length and Depth of Berth 3 ( mts) -- -- 330, 14
Length and Depth of Berth 4 ( mts) -- -- 330, 14
Regarding the readiness of the Port of Guaymas to establish a container terminal, there are two
main differences in terms of infrastructure between the Port of Guaymas and the ports of
Ensenada and Colombo: depth of berths and navigation channels, and the availability of sea- to-shore
quay cranes. In order to see what the impact of not having a shallower berth depth in the
Port of Guaymas would be, we looked at the maximum draft ( fully loaded) information of the
ships that called on the Port of Manzanillo during the year 2005 ( up to November) and then we
compared this information with the depth available in Guaymas. In order to make this
comparison we assumed that the maximum draft that Guaymas could handle was the depth minus
one meter, or 10 meters of draft. Figure 5.3 shows the distribution of maximum draft ( fully
loaded) of the container ships ( geared with cranes) that called in the port of Manzanillo during the
first eleven months of the year 2005 ( Excel sheet with arrivals provided by Direccion General de
Puertos, 2005b). The red ( left) line represents the limit in maximum draft imposed by the depth
of the docking positions. The green ( right) line represents the limit if the docking position were
dredged to the same depth as the navigation channel. It is important to note that this limit does
not necessarily apply to every ship, only when it is fully loaded.
However, to have the flexibility and be able to grow in the future we believe that a strategic
analysis of the depth of the different navigational areas of the Port, and particularly in the
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 26
terminal area, should be performed. This is particularly true given the current trend of every
major port to dredge navigational spaces to accommodate the mega- container ships that require
depths in excess of 15 meters.
As a part of the activities related to the
inventory of the current infrastructure,
we made a physical inspection of all
the areas of the Port of Guaymas and
photographed the main working areas
of the Port. In Figure 5.2, we present
one of the proposed container yards
with some of the current container
handling equipment. In this image we
can observe one container gantry
crane and a container handling truck.
5.2 The Simulation Model
The Port of Guaymas does not currently have an operating container terminal. For this reason it
was not possible to take direct measurements to establish the capacity of the container terminal.
In order to make an estimation of this capacity we relied on simulation models that were
developed specifically to analyze the potential performance of an operating container terminal
and to assess a preliminary estimation of the capacity of the Port in terms of TEU. The models
Figure 5.2 â€“ Handling Equipment at the Port of
Guaymas
Figure 5.3 â€“ Distribution of Maximum Draft
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 27
are based on the ProModel Â® V6.0, a Montecarlo simulation package, and its aim is to obtain a
valid, logical representation of the performance of the port if container service is established.
Some of the elements built into the model include: current and predicted levels of infrastructure,
scheduled arrivals of container ships, internal operations of container terminal and rail and truck
entry and exit processes. The characteristics built into the model are in accordance with the
Master Development Plan ( Administracion Portuaria Integral de Guaymas, 2005) prepared by
the Port of Guaymas. But in order to run a more realistic simulation model, a slightly different
inventory of equipment from the one currently in place in the Port of Guaymas is necessary.
Table 5.3 presents a comparison between the current actual equipment inventory in the port and
that assumed in the main two general scenarios considered in the simulation. For a more detailed
description of the assumptions and the model, the reader is referred to Appendix I, which includes
a complete report of the simulation analysis.
Since there was no operating container terminal on the port, we designed the potential operation
of the terminal based on our review of similar ports, the UNCTAD Port Development Handbook
( UNCTAD, 1985) and on interviews with operations personnel from the Port of Guaymas. The
graphical interface of the simulation is presented in Figure 5.4, which shows the final design of
the container terminal and its different areas.
Table 5.3 â€“ Infrastructure between the Current State and the Simulated Scenarios
Description Current State Scenario 1 Scenario 2
Container Quay Cranes -- -- 2
Container Yard Crane 2 3 3
Forklifts 22 12 12
Chassis 7 12 12
Trucks 3 7 7
Container Shuttle ( Hustlers) 5 12 12
Yard Capacity in Containers -- 6552 6552
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 28
The main objective of the simulation was to estimate the current capacity, resource requirements
( cranes, trackers, forklifts) and bottlenecks. This technique allows the generation of several
scenarios with different port configurations ( resource availability and capacity, arrival and service
time policies) in order to evaluate different potential outcomes. Table 5.4 presents the different
scenarios analyzed. The first column gives the scenario number. The second column shows the
number of TEU arriving per week to the port. For this instance we used three different levels: the
baseline or 400 TEU per week; an expanded scenario of 1,200 weekly TEU; and a third scenario
of 2,000 TEU per week as the upper limit of the current capacity of the port â€“ this is roughly
175,000 TEU per year. This third scenario was set by observing the utilization of the Portâ€™s
equipment under increased demands. We believe that this capacity represents a conservative
scenario for the current conditions of the Port, which may review upwards once the exact
container terminal configuration is determined and analyzed.
The third and fourth columns give the total number of incoming and outgoing containers passing
though the port. In order to arrive at the numbers shown in this column we made assumptions of
empty containers for exportation being 70% of the loaded containers arriving to the port; and a
Figure 5.4 â€“ Screen of the Simulation Program
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 29
particular mix between two sizes of containers 40â€™ ( 74%) and 20â€™ ( 26%). The fifth and six
columns give the mix of containers ( in percentage) leaving the Port of Guaymas by truck and
train. The next column is the total number of yard cranes assumed by the simulation. In this case
we assumed three cranes for the container yard operation which is one more than what was
available when we did the infrastructure inventory of the port. Next column represents the
number of quay cranes considered in the simulation â€“ having used two levels: zero and two
cranes. The former number represents the current level and the latter represent the level we
believe will make the port feasible, in terms of ship turnaround times, for attracting shipping
lines. Gearing the Port with these cranes, however, represent the single main investment on the
Port considered in this analysis. Column nine represents the number of onboard cranes used by a
ship to load and unload containers when a quay crane is not available. Columns 10 thru 15 show
the rest of the equipment infrastructure considered in each of the scenarios. This infrastructure is
the same or slightly higher than what is currently available at the port.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 30
Table 5.4 â€“ Scenarios Analyzed for the Operation of the Port of Guaymas
Containers/ Week Ship Method
Hustler Yard Quay Ship
Cases TEU Full Empty
Truck
%
Train
% Hustler FC Crane Crane Crane Forklift Module Tug
1 400 230 168 0 100 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
2 400 230 168 100 0 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
3 400 230 168 50 50 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
4 400 230 168 30 70 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
5 400 230 168 70 30 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
6 1200 690 480 0 100 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
7 1200 690 480 100 0 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
8 1200 690 480 50 50 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
9 1200 690 480 30 70 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
10 1200 690 480 70 30 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
11 400 230 168 0 100 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
12 400 230 168 100 0 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
13 400 230 168 50 50 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
14 400 230 168 70 30 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
15 400 230 168 30 70 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
16 1200 690 480 0 100 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
17 1200 690 480 100 0 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
18 1200 690 480 50 50 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
19 1200 690 480 70 30 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
20 1200 690 480 30 70 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
21 2000 1150 800 50 50 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
22 2000 1150 800 50 50 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 31
The results corresponding to each of the previous scenarios are shown in Table 5.5. The first six
columns of this table give the scenario information. The column 7 gives the ship turnaround time
in hours. This is the time it takes for a ship to be serviced by the Port of Guaymas from the time
it arrives to the outside stopping buoy to the time it leaves the port. The eighth column gives the
time in hours the ship was docked in the port. Columns nine and ten represent the time a
container takes to leave the port in hours from the time it arrives to the port to the times it leaves
the port by either train or truck. The next two columns, 11 and 12: show the number of loaded
containers leaving the port by train or truck in a simulated period of two years. Column thirteen
gives the average number of containers in the container yard during the simulated period. The
fourteenth column gives the average utilization for berth three. In this case it is important to
highlight that berth four ( second container berth) was never used in the simulation. The last
column gives the maximum utilization ( in containers) of the container yard. It was assumed that
the port worked a schedule of 24 hours/ 7 days a week and it was assumed that the ships were
uniformly spaced during the week and each ship carried an average of 400 TEU. Some of the
results that can be derived from the simulation study include:
Table 5.5 â€“ Results for the Scenarios Analyzed for the Operation of the Port
Containers/ Week Ship Method
T/ A Time in Time Time # Cont # Cont # Cont Dock Max
Cases TEU Full Empty
Truck
(%)
Train
(%) Vessel Dock Rail Truck Rail Truck Yard Util Yard
1 400 230 168 0 100 27.12 25.62 32.32 -- 24112.7 -- 123.18 0.15 384
2 400 230 168 100 0 27.05 25.55 -- 11.09 -- 24109 92.52 0.15 311
3 400 230 168 50 50 27.1 25.6 30.27 11.14 11878.4 12233 106.39 0.15 314
4 400 230 168 30 70 27.05 25.56 29.03 12.04 16656.8 7429 110.91 0.15 328
5 400 230 168 70 30 27.05 25.55 37.03 11.09 7112 16987 103.42 0.15 314
6 1200 690 480 0 100 26.02 25.25 33.32 -- 71881.6 -- 192.83 0.45 391
7 1200 690 480 100 0 26.01 25.23 -- 11.09 -- 718812 99.57 0.45 315
8 1200 690 480 50 50 26.03 25.25 26.71 11.18 35579.2 36353 132.49 0.45 319
9 1200 690 480 30 70 26.02 25.25 28.43 12.58 49844 22073 152.22 0.45 337
10 1200 690 480 70 30 26.03 25.25 28.89 11.11 21327.2 50619 121.77 0.45 309
11 400 230 168 0 100 12.17 10.82 32.3 -- 24100.8 -- 125.72 0.06 466
12 400 230 168 100 0 12.16 10.8 -- 7.12 -- 24115 90.1 0.06 436
13 400 230 168 50 50 12.2 10.83 26.56 7.07 11916.8 12213 104.33 0.06 445
14 400 230 168 70 30 12.2 10.84 32.63 7.16 7150.4 16981 101.72 0.06 450
15 400 230 168 30 70 12.2 10.84 29.48 6.97 16734.4 7403 112.59 0.06 454
16 1200 690 480 0 100 11.48 10.75 31.44 -- 71856.8 -- 201.16 0.19 474
17 1200 690 480 100 0 11.46 10.73 -- 7.11 -- 71855 98.77 0.19 446
18 1200 690 480 50 50 11.48 10.74 23.94 7.07 35636.8 36296 134.35 0.19 449
19 1200 690 480 70 30 11.48 10.75 25.29 7.17 21276.8 50617 122.12 0.19 445
20 1200 690 480 30 70 11.48 10.75 27.04 6.97 49760 22187 157.2 0.19 461
21 2000 1150 800 50 50 24.3 23.7 25.1 11.23 70980 72624 160.83 0.83 311
22 2000 1150 800 50 50 10.71 10.14 23.01 7.09 71068 72628 168.89 0.35 436
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 32
1. There is a significant difference between the turnaround times for the scenarios of the
Post operating with and without quay cranes. This difference is of about 14 hours. The
average time without quay cranes is of about 26.34 hours and 11.73 for the scenarios with
quay cranes ( see Figure 5.5 and Figure 5.6). This is consistent with the turnaround time
reported by the Port of Manzanillo for similar scenarios ( See Appendix I).
2. The capacity of the container yard did not represent a constraint under the simulated
conditions. However, an assumption was made that the containers would leave the
Vessel Turnaround Time
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
Port Equipment
Avg Hours
W/ Quay Cranes
W/ O Quay Cranes
Figure 5.5 â€“ Vessel Turnaround Time
1 & 11
2 & 12
3 & 13
4 & 14
5 & 15
6 & 16
7 & 17
8 & 18
9 & 19
10 & 20
11 & 22
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
Avg Hours
Scenarios
Vessel Turnaround Time
W/ Quay Cranes W/ O Quay Cranes
Figure 5.6 â€“ Vessel Turnaround Time
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 33
container yard as soon as truck or rail transportation was available. This is consistent
with a transshipment ( or export) operation, but overly optimistic for a domestic operation.
3. Under the simulated conditions the docking facility does not seem to be a major
constraint for the capacity of the port. However, it was observed that the utilization for
one of berths, at the maximum level of demand, approached 85% when the cranes of the
ship were used to unload/ load containers. This is in contrast with the 35% reported when
quay cranes are used. Something that needs to be mentioned is that the simulation used
only one of the berths available. On the surface, this would seem to imply that the
capacity reported ( 175,000 TEU) would be obtained with only one berthing position.
However, we can not make this claim because the simulation was based on the
assumption that six ships per week would visit the port in a time- uniform basis. This is
hardly the case in real- life situation. Thus, the capacity number reported should be read as
being based on the availability of two berthing position. A higher resolution simulation
could be used to refine the capacity estimate.
4. Although the simulation was not run to the limit of the capacity of the port, we can draw
the inference that the crane ( or the lack thereof) factor was the main determinant of the
capacity of the operation of the container terminal.
5. The maximum capacity analyzed was based on similar operations. We believe that this
capacity ( around 175,000 TEU) represents a lower limit of the capacity of the port rather
than a hard upper limit. However, with the information available at the time of the study
it was the number with which we felt comfortable. A more precise study could provide a
revised capacity of the Port of Guaymas.
From the perspective of the time needed to for a container to leave the port, once it is unloaded,
we can see that the truck option is more efficient ( see Figure 5.7 and Figure 5.8). However, this
alternative could be significantly more expensive than the rail alternative.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 34
In order to verify and validate the simulation model we followed two approaches: verifying with
experts and comparing the results of the simulation with operations of similar characteristics.
After the first version of the simulation for the Port of Guaymas was finished we invited the
operations personnel of this port to review the simulation and the assumptions included in the
model. From this review the personnel from the port agreed on the general validity of the
assumptions and we made some minor adjustments to the model.
1 & 11
2 & 12
3 & 13
4 & 14
5 & 15
6 & 16
7 & 17
8 & 18
9 & 19
10 & 20
11 & 22
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
Avg Hours
Scenario
Container Time in System
W/ Quay Cranes by Truck W/ O Quay Cranes by Truck
W/ Quay Cranes by Train W/ O Quay Cranes by Train
Figure 5.7 â€“ Container Time in System
Container Time in System
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
Port Equimpent & Transportation
Avg Hours
W/ Quay Cranes by Truck
W/ O Quay Cranes by Truck
W/ Quay Cranes by Train
W/ O Quay Cranes by Train
Figure 5.8 â€“ Container Time in System
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 35
In order to further validate the simulation model we compare the performance measures given by
the simulation to data available for container operations for the Port of Manzanillo. We made the
comparison for the operations based on the turnaround times of the container ships for the cases
where the cranes of the ships were used to unload and load containers and also for the cases for
which quay cranes had been used ( See Appendix I). The results obtained supported the validity
of the simulation model. Although we believe that the current simulation model reflects the
general operation of a container terminal, we also believe that this simulation model can be
significantly improved by having access to higher- resolution operational data. For instance, some
of the parameters are based on historical averages rather than precise time distributions. The
availability of this data would render a more precise simulation model.
5.3 Summary of the Infrastructure of the Port of Guaymas
From an infrastructure perspective, we believe that the port of Guaymas, with some minor
improvements, such as the acquisition of additional container handling yard equipment, is ready
to start a container service comparable to that of the Port of Mazatlan; that is, a regional
container service.
However, the current main limitation of the port capacity is the current unavailability of quay
cranes. This precludes the Port of Guaymas from being able to offer efficient turnaround services
to the modern container ships that are not geared with their own cranes. This in turn may limit
the potential of the Port of Guaymas to serve as an efficient gateway port for container service
beyond the local region. In order to provide this service we believe that at least two quay cranes
are needed. The exact capacity and characteristics of the quay cranes and related issues, such as
the need for reinforcement of the piloting system of the port is beyond the scope of this study.
In our analysis, we have made assumptions about the type of infrastructure and level of service
needed to attract a shipping line to establish a port of call by a major container shipping line.
However, the exact needs, in terms of service and demand, should be explored with the shipping
companies. We also assumed that the operational performance of the Port and the authorities was
efficient, but this is hardly the case in the operation of other Mexican ports ( Peyrelonge et al.,
2003), so we also advise to consider additional research into the efficient operations of all the
activities involved in importing and exporting the cargo in the Port. Both of these issues are left
as future research.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 36
6 Analysis of the Mariposa Port of Entry
The main purpose of the analysis of the Mariposa Port of Entry ( POE) was to determine the
impact that the operation of a container terminal in Guaymas would have on the operations of the
port. Some of the measures of performance selected to assess this impact included: average time
of trucks to clear inspection and operational hours of Mariposa to clear the demand.
The analysis of the POE was divided into the following activities:
1. Documenting the process map of the container processing operations.
2. Developing a simulation model to estimate: capacity, bottlenecks, and cycle times.
3. Obtaining information on projected demands and flows.
4. Identifying bottlenecks in the operations.
As shown in Figure 6.1, the information obtained from the Port of Guaymas simulation model
was used as input in the Mariposa POE simulation model to obtain the desired results. A brief
description of the process map and the simulation model developed follow.
The Mariposa Port of Entry is the name given to the inspection compound which every
commercial vehicle entering the United States ( US) must go through if crossing at the city of
Nogales. When a truck enters the inspection process, it can be released automatically or
requested to go through different inspection stations before being authorized to cross from the
port to the US.
The whole system can be divided into four different sections:
1. Pre- Screening and Primary Inspection: These are the first two steps in the process and
all trucks go through them.
2. Secondary Inspection: Different tasks can be done in this section: normal secondary
inspection, 100% inspection ( unloading all the cargo), weapons and enforcement
inspection, and others.
Figure 6.1 â€“ Mariposa POE Simulation Input
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 37
3. X- Ray: There are two stations for X- Ray inspection.
4. ADOT Compound: ADOTâ€™s Motor Vehicle Division safety inspection and other
Federal inspections are conducted here.
The flow diagram in Figure 6.2 shows the logic followed by trucks in the simulation. For more
detailed information about the Mariposa POE Process see Appendix D.
While the trucks move through all the different individually required steps of the inspection
process, several institutions work together. A partial list includes:
1. Customs and Border Protection ( CBP)
2. United States Department of Agriculture ( USDA)
3. Food and Drug Administration ( FDA)
Figure 6.2 â€“ Mariposa POE Simulation Process Map
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 38
4. Arizona Department of Transportation ( ADOT)
5. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration ( FMCSA)
The physical movement of the trucks is simple and can be observed in the animation of the
simulation ( Figure 6.3 shows an image of the simulation interface and the different stations).
Currently: [ 1] trucks cross the border in two lanes, [ 2] enter one of the two pre- screening stations,
[ 3] follow to one of the four primary inspection super- booths, and then proceed to Nogales,
Arizona ( AZ) or remain in the compound for further inspection always driving in a Counter
Clock Wise ( CCW) motion around the compound [ 4, 5, 6 & 7]. These rules are adjusted as the
team at Mariposa attempts to be more efficient and to react to demand changes.
In order to determine the impact on the Mariposa POE of a container terminal in the Port of
Guaymas different scenarios were run using simulation models. After defining the different
scenarios to be analyzed and obtaining results from the Port of Guaymas simulation, the obtained
information was used to make an assessment of the Mariposa POE capacity, and the impact of the
Figure 6.3 â€“ Graphical Interface of the Simulation Program for the Mariposa POE
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 39
containerized cargo moving by highway on the POE. The information used for each scenario is
shown in Table 6.1. The first column gives the scenario number ( in accordance with the
scenarios ran in the Port of Guaymas simulation shown in Table 5.4). The second column shows
the TEU per week expected to pass through Guaymas. On the third column the number of actual
containers to be moved weekly by the Port of Guaymas is presented. In the fourth and fifth
column the distribution percentage assumed for containers being moved by truck and by rail is
shown. The sixth column shows a current high season demand assumed to analyze the different
scenarios; this number was fixed based on historic data and current demand in the port of entry.
The extra demand expected daily from the Guaymasâ€™ port operation is shown in the seventh
column and the total number of containers to cross the Mariposa POE is shown in the last
column.
The results of running the simulation of the POE in the previously described scenarios are shown
in Table 6.2. The first four columns show the scenario conditions. The sixth column shows the
Table 6.1 â€“ Information Used for Each Scenario for the Mariposa POE
Cases TEU Containers Truck Current Qty Exit Extra Rate Total
%
Rail
% Demand Port Demand ( min) Demand
Current -- -- -- -- 1300 0 0 0 1300
1 400 230 0 100 -- -- -- -- -
2 400 230 100 0 1300 230 154 3.9 1454
3 400 230 50 50 1300 108 76 7.93 1376
4 400 230 30 70 1300 72 42 14.5 1342
5 400 230 70 30 1300 50 50 5.5 1350
6 1200 690 0 100 -- -- -- -- -
7 1200 690 100 0 1300 233 154 3.9 1454
8 1200 690 50 50 1300 128 73 8.3 1373
9 1200 690 30 70 1300 74 38 16.07 1338
10 1200 690 70 30 1300 164 110 5.49 1410
11 400 230 0 100 -- -- -- -- -
12 400 230 100 0 1300 239 239 1.99 1539
13 400 230 50 50 1300 113 113 3.55 1413
14 400 230 70 30 1300 157 157 2.8 1457
15 400 230 30 70 1300 76 76 6.47 1376
16 1200 690 0 100 -- -- -- -- -
17 1200 690 100 0 1300 233 233 1.97 1533
18 1200 690 50 50 1300 112 112 3.57 1412
19 1200 690 70 30 1300 169 169 2.8 1469
20 1200 690 30 70 1300 68 68 5.85 1368
21 2000 1150 50 50 1300 105 77 7.83 1377
22 2000 1150 50 50 1300 112 112 3.82 1412
Max -- -- -- -- 2000 0 0 0 2000
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 40
expected average time in the system of each truck moving through Mariposa. In the seventh
column, the total amount of minutes required to process the demand of any given day is shown.
The extra hours required ( against the current working time) to clear the compound with the
increased activity is shown in the eighth column. The ninth column is the highest observation of
trucks in queue to enter the compound. On the tenth and eleventh columns show the bottleneck
of the system and its utilization for the simulation study. Finally, in column twelve the nominal
utilization of the POE ( total demand divided by total capacity) is estimated based on the 1,500
trucks/ day capacity stated by Mariposaâ€™s personnel.
Some of the results that can be derived from the simulation include the following:
1. The expected average time for each truck to go through the port of entry will increase
from a current 45.67 Â± 6.03 minutes delay to a 101.86 Â± 9.63 minutes expected worst
Table 6.2 â€“ Results of Running the Simulation of the POE
Cases TEU TEU
Per Year
Truck
(%)
Total
Demand
( truck)
Truck
Time
In
System
Operation
Time
( minutes)
Extra
Hours
Max in
Queue
( trucks)
Bottle-neck
Reported
Util.
POE
Util.
Current - - - 1300 45.22 764.22 1.74 163 PSA 75.69% 86.67%
1 400 20,800 0 % - - - - - - - -
2 400 20,800 100 % 1454 75.34 830.82 2.85 278 PSA 75.64% 96.93%
3 400 20,800 50 % 1376 57.97 830.45 2.84 265 PSA 73.27% 91.73%
4 400 20,800 30 % 1342 50.01 820.36 2.67 217 PSA 72.49% 89.47%
5 400 20,800 70 % 1350 61.1 808.24 2.47 202 PSA 74.69% 90.00%
6 1200 62,400 0 % - - - - - - - -
7 1200 62,400 100 % 1454 75.34 830.82 2.85 278 PSA 75.64% 96.93%
8 1200 62,400 50 % 1373 63.54 838.7 2.98 238 PSA 72.93% 91.53%
9 1200 62,400 30 % 1338 57.46 840.94 3.02 202 PSA 70.70% 89.20%
10 1200 62,400 70 % 1410 68.64 851.05 3.18 259 PSA 73.83% 94.00%
11 400 20,800 0 % - - - - - - - -
12 400 20,800 100 % 1539 101.41 897.18 3.95 401 PSA 76.65% 102.60%
13 400 20,800 50 % 1413 76.94 856.84 3.28 294 PSA 73.49% 94.20%
14 400 20,800 70 % 1457 80.91 835.51 2.93 280 PSA 78.05% 97.13%
15 400 20,800 30 % 1376 58.21 844.87 3.08 191 PSA 72.61% 91.73%
16 1200 62,400 0 % - - - - - - - -
17 1200 62,400 100 % 1533 96.14 881.52 3.69 355 PSA 76.98% 102.20%
18 1200 62,400 50 % 1412 72.13 854.13 3.24 271 PSA 73.75% 94.13%
19 1200 62,400 70 % 1469 84.8 874.52 3.58 309 PSA 74.65% 97.93%
20 1200 62,400 30 % 1368 62.83 831.53 2.86 200 PSA 73.88% 91.20%
21 2000 104,000 50 % 1377 58.44 841.42 3.02 203 PSA 73.06% 91.80%
22 2000 104,000 50 % 1412 75.06 839.8 3.00 246 PSA 76.26% 94.13%
Max - - - 2000 197.91 1,139.78 8.00 835 PSA 78.41% 133.33%
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 41
case scenario delay â€“ when 239 ( in average) containers leave the port of Guaymas in a
single day at a rate enough to reach the border the same day ( See Appendix H for details).
2. The impact of having quay cranes operating at the port of Guaymas â€“ and the increased
rate and number of trucks going to Mariposa; will impact the average waiting time per
truck from a 63.10 minutes wait to cross the border ( no quay cranes) to a 79.71 minutes
( see Figure 6.4).
3. The only case with marginal difference in inspection times was the Max scenario in
which the waiting time increased to 198.36 Â± 9.50 ( see Figure 6.5). As it was advised by
the personnel at Mariposa, demand over 1â€™ 500 trucks/ day would be considered over
capacity and have an impact in the waiting times.
Truck Time in System
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
90.00
Average Minutes
Port of Guaymas Low Efficience Port of Guaymas High Efficience
Figure 6.4 â€“ Average Truck Time in System
Current & Max
2 & 12
3 & 13
4 & 14
5 & 15
7 & 17
8 & 18
9 & 19
10 & 20
21 & 22
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Average Minutes
Trucks Time in System
Port of Guaymas Low Efficience Port of Guaymas High Efficience
Figure 6.5 â€“ Average Trucks Time in System per Scenario
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 42
4. The processing of the additional demand could require up to 2.2 additional hours of
operation of the POE personnel ( see Figure 6.6). Based on current information from
Mariposa, we know that to process a daily demand of 1,300 trucks an additional 1.5 hours
should be worked over regular schedule â€“ to finish around 8: 30 pm. We can estimate that
under current operation conditions, i. e., same facilities and personnel; it could be required
for the POE to work almost 4 extra hours ( 11 pm) to clear the demand in a worst case
scenario â€“ when 239 ( in average) containers leave the port of Guaymas in a single day at a
rate enough to reach the border the same day.
5. The bottleneck of the system is the pre- screening station and this will be the first to
require an upgrade in order to be more efficient.
In order to verify and validate the model we used some common techniques for simulation.
Information regarding the inspection process was utilized to build a logic flow. A first visit to the
POE served to collect current information on the system performance. After a preliminary model
was developed, a meeting with personnel of Custom Border Protection ( CBP) and ADOT helped
to validate the current flow of trucks in the compound. With the purpose of having accurate
results of the processing times, our staff joined CBP personnel for a validation session. The
feedback we received is included in the results of this report.
It is important to mention that our capacity analysis is based on the current infrastructure in place.
CBP is about to implement ( see letter from Donna de la Torre in Appendix J) some programs,
such as Fastlane and E- Manifest, that should have a positive impact on the currently installed
Current & Max
2 & 12
3 & 13
4 & 14
5 & 15
7 & 17
8 & 18
9 & 19
10 & 20
21 & 22
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Average Minutes
Required Operational Hours
Port of Guaymas Low Efficience Port of Guaymas High Efficience
Figure 6.6 â€“ Required Operational Hours to Clear Compound
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 43
capacity of the Mariposa Port of Entry. The exact impact of these programs is something that
should be analyzed in the future.
6.1 Summary of the Analysis
According to the analysis performed to the operation of the Mariposa POE, its current utilization
is already high ( over 85%) during the peak time of the year. This means that any additional traffic
to the port can have a significant impact on the operations of itself if it is not managed
appropriately. In our analysis we made the assumption that the hours of operation of the port
would be flexible to accommodate the additional traffic. If this is the case, the impact from the
operation of a container terminal in the Port of Guaymas goes from negligible â€“ for the most likely
scenario; to considerable when: 1) 100% of the containers from the Port of Guaymas move by
highway, 2) a demand based on the peak season of the operation of the POE is assumed, and 3)
the Port of Guaymas is operating with two quay cranes. It must be noticed that the maximum
amount of trucks that can be processed daily at Mariposa POE under current operation conditions
is around 1,500 trucks. Considering a current demand of up to 1,300 per day: it can only serve
200 trucks extra per day approximately â€“ or only 104,000 TEU ( see Table 9.3) extra per year;
without significantly affecting the waiting times currently observed. Itâ€™s fair to mention that the
results obtained are based on the assumption that the demand is that one observed during the peak
of the produce season in Mexico ( which corresponds to winter months).
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 44
7 Analysis of Highway Infrastructure Supporting the Port of Guaymas
The analysis of the highway infrastructure was divided into the following activities:
1. Identification of the main highways of the Corridor.
2. Identification of highway network in terms of links and nodes.
3. Developing the appropriate models for the analysis of the highway network.
4. Determination of current state of the highway network and the effects of added traffic
caused by the operation of a container service in the Port of Guaymas.
5. Estimation of the capacity and its utilization in each of the components of the network.
6. Identification of the bottleneck points.
In terms of highways, in the Mexican
side we focused on the Federal Highway
15, which is the main transportation link
between the Port of Guaymas and
Nogales ( Sonora) and the main
transportation link between Sonora and
Arizona ( Wilbur Smith Associates,
2001). On the US side of the border we
focused on the Highway I- 19 that
connects the City of Nogales ( AZ) with
the City of Tucson. In Figure 7.1 we
present a Geographic Information
Systems ( GIS) map that contains the
visual information of the main highways
being studied. For a detailed description
of the roads included in the study the
reader is referred to Appendix E of this
report.
As part of the analysis we divided the highway infrastructure into nodes and links ( or segments).
We defined links as segments of the highway that have similar characteristics in terms of
Figure 7.1 â€“ GIS Map of the Corridor under Study
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 45
infrastructure, such as lanes, cargo capacity, clearance, and so forth. Nodes were defined as
places where transfers between modes can occur or where the performance conditions are
different, such as in populated places, toll booths or ports of entry ( see Appendix E). The idea
behind this approach is to determine the capacity and utilization in each one of the links and
nodes in order to identify the bottleneck of the network. The cities of Tucson and Hermosillo, the
Mariposa Port of Entry in Nogales, and the Port of Guaymas were identified as the main nodes in
the highway network ( see Appendix E).
Because of their complexity, it was necessary to develop Montecarlo simulation models for the
analysis of the Port of Guaymas and the Mariposa Port of Entry. The results of these analyses are
presented in Sections 5 and 6 of this report. The capacity analysis of the rest of the links and
nodes of the highway network is presented next.
The capacity of the other nodes and links in the system was calculated analytically based on
estimates of current conditions of these nodes. For these calculations we followed the
recommendations and data provided by the Highway Performance Monitoring system ( HPMS)
( Arizona Department of Transportation ADOT, 2005a), the Highway Capacity Manual ( HCM)
( Transportation Research Board, 1994), the Multimodal Corridor and the Capacity Analysis
Manual ( MCCAM) ( Cambridge Systematics Inc., 1998). The volume and estimated capacity are
expressed in passenger cars per hour ( PCPH) and capacity utilization. The data used for the flow
( volume) of vehicles, was registered by permanent stations located at different segments of the
road. The data was obtained from official data reports from ADOT and SCT ( ADOT 2005b,
2005c and SCT 2005). The exact methodology used to arrive at the different capacity estimations
is presented in Appendix F.
The capacity for the highway segments were estimated based on the HPMS methodology, which
is a standard methodology ( ADOT, 2005a) to estimate the capacity of the highways for the State
of Arizona. The capacity results for the highway links in the State of Arizona can be observed in
Figure 7.2. Where the level of service ( LOS) is a measure of the current utilization of the
capacity of the highways ( volume/ capacity). Thus, the highways that are at capacity or near
capacity have a LOS (. 90 â€“ 1.0 utilization). This is the case for the segment of the Interstate- 19 ( I-
19) that connects with the I- 10 in the City of Tucson. This LOS indicates that at certain periods
of the day there is significant congestion on this highway, which might create delays and queues
for vehicles traveling at those periods of the day. Other than the city of Tucson, the rest of the
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 46
highway in Arizona seems to have enough capacity for the volume of vehicles they currently
handle.
The results for the Mexican highway are presented in Figure 7.3, and shows that there is not a
significant point of congestion along the Mexican highway linking Guaymas and Nogales,
Sonora. The road segment with the lowest remaining capacity and with highest utilization ( 0.28)
is located in the highway segment linking the Port of Guaymas to the town of Empalme where the
highway is reduced to a two- lane rural road. There is an alternative, more direct, route linking the
Port of Guaymas to Highway 15 that goes though the City of Guaymas. However, this route was
not considered in the analysis because we felt that this route was not likely to be used by the
container- carrying traffic from the Port of Guaymas.
LOS
( Volum e / Capac ity )
ô€‚ƒ A: ( 0.01- 0 .3)
ô€‚ƒ B: ( 0.31- 0 .5)
ô€‚ƒ C: ( 0.51- 0 .7)
ô€‚ƒ D: ( 0.71- 0 .9)
ô€‚ƒ E: ( 0.91- 1 .0)
Figure 7.2 â€“ Highway Capacity in Arizona
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 47
For the Mexican Highway, we encountered that HPMS information was not readily available, so
we had to calculate the capacity using the information provided by the Instituto Mexicano del
Transporte ( Bello et al., 2001) for the Mexican roads. We followed the same methodology used
in Arizona and we also consistently used the information provided in the Highway Capacity
Manual ( 2000). In order to obtain some of the information needed for our analysis, related to the
physical characteristics of the highway, we had to physically inspect the highway ( See for
instance Figure 7.4). For a detailed description of the methodology the reader is referred to
Appendix F.
LOS
( Volume/ Capacity)
â€¢ A: ( 0.01- 0.3)
â€¢ B: ( 0.31- 0.5)
â€¢ C: ( 0.51- 0.7)
â€¢ D: ( 0.71- 0.9)
â€¢ E: ( 0.91- 1.0)
Figure 7.3 â€“ Highway Capacity in Sonora
Figure 7.4 â€“ Mexican Highway Inspection
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 48
Another potential point of congestion is located at the City of Hermosillo along the route used by
heavy vehicles to traverse the city. This segment of the road is constrained by traffic lights and
speed bumps, increasing the utilization of this segment of the road to 0.49 ( See Table 7.1). In
order to arrive to this utilization, since no actual traffic recording for this precise route was
available, we used the maximum flow of vehicles recorded in the entry points to the city of
Hermosillo. Using this flow, and the most restrictive segment along this urban route ( two lanes
with speed bumps), we obtained an estimate of the capacity of this segment of the highway
network. As it turned out, there are only two other more restrictive segments along the entire
highway network analyzed: just north of Mariposa POE and the entrance to the city of Tucson,
both the in the US side of the border.
Other nodes of the highway network that can potentially be the bottleneck of the network is at
Benjamin Hill, Sonora. In this point there is a military checkpoint in which all the busses and
trucks going thorough it are inspected. Since we did not have access to direct data on traffic or
inspection times at this facility we collected anecdotal data from interviews with trucking
companies that use the Corridor, among them Transportes Pitic, which is a trucking company
based in Sonora ( Cons, 2005). According to these interviews we estimate an average wait in this
checkpoint of one hour. However, we have received anecdotal information that this time can
increase to up to 3.5 hours in the high season according to data collected by SCT ( Armenta,
2005). Table 7.1 summarizes our findings related to highway capacity and utilization. A
detailed discussion on how the results in this table were obtained is presented in Appendix F.
Table 7.1 â€“ Capacity Estimates for the different nodes in PCPH
Node Lanes Volume/ Hour Capacity/ Hour LOS
Guaymas 2 268.15 1180.33 0.23
Toll 1 3 140.00 1050.00 0.13
Hermosillo 2 556.05 1142.86 0.49
Toll 2 3 356.27 1050.00 0.34
Benjamin Hill 2 226.17 702.00 0.32
Santa Ana 2 173.71 1152.00 0.15
Toll 3 3 224.00 1050.00 0.21
Imuris 2 224.16 1152.00 0.19
Toll 4 3 294.00 1050.00 0.28
Nogales, AZ 2 872.00 1672.00 0.52
Tucson 2 4314.00 4271.00 1.01
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 49
7.1 Summary of Highway Capacity
From the information collected at the different traffic stations located in Mexico and the US, we
were able to calculate the critical flow per hour at different segments of the highways. With this
data and the information collected about the physical infrastructure of the highways, we were able
to estimate the current capacity and utilization of the corridor highways. The results obtained are
presented in Figure 7.2 and Figure 7.3 and summarized in Table 7.1.
These results show that currently the highways from Guaymas to Tucson seem to have enough
capacity to handle additional traffic. Since the operation of the container terminal will only
increment a fraction of at most 1- 2 percent ( e. g. from .20 to .22) of the current level of demand,
as it will be explained in Section 9, we expect that the operation of a container terminal in the
Port of Guaymas would not affect the current highway utilization in a significant way. The impact
of the operation of the Port of Guaymas on the Mariposa Port of Entry was previously analyzed in
Section 6.
Two points of concern are the City of Tucson and the checkpoint station at Benjamin Hill. The
highway segment connecting the Interstate Highway I- 19 to Interstate I- 10 presents high levels of
utilization. However, we believe that this corresponds to the rush hour of the City of Tucson, and
the utilization of this highway segment for the rest of the day is significantly lower. Regarding
Benjamin Hill our concern lies on the lack of hard data to support our capacity estimates. We feel
that this facility should be studied in further detail to provide a better characterization of its
current capacity utilization.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 50
8 Analysis of Railroad Infrastructure Supporting the Port
The analysis of the railroad infrastructure was divided into the following activities:
1. Gathering information about the current railroad infrastructure from ADOT, UP and
Ferromex.
2. Identify the main ( modal interchange) nodes in the system.
3. Developing the appropriate models for the analysis of the railroad network.
4. Determination of current state of the railroad network and the effects of added traffic
caused by the operation of a container service in the Port of Guaymas.
5. Estimation of the capacity and its utilization in each of the components of the railroad
network.
6. Identification of the bottleneck points.
The second major transportation mode researched are the railroad linking Guaymas to Nogales,
Sonora and Nogales to Tucson, Arizona. These railroad segments are owned by private
companies. The segment between Guaymas and Nogales is owned by Ferromex and the line from
Nogales ( AZ) to Tucson is owned by Union Pacific. Union Pacific also owns the main line from
Tucson to El Paso, Texas and from Tucson to Yuma, Arizona. Although for all practical purposes
these are separate companies, Union Pacific has a stake in Ferromex, so there is some potential
for coordination between the two companies. A combined network is presented in Figure 7.1, and
a detailed description of the railroad line is presented in Appendix E.
For the railroad, the main nodes identified are the intermodal and inspection terminals in the Port
of Guaymas, the Port of Tucson and the DeConcini port of entry/ Rio Rico ( which are considered
as a single node for the purpose of this analysis). For these facilities ( with the exception of the
Port of Guaymas) we use a rough estimate of their capacity based on standard capacity
calculations for railroads. There are also other nodes in the system where the trains are
processed; these include the switching yards of Empalme, Nogales and Tucson. In the case of the
railroads the military inspection of the cargo does not occur at Benjamin Hill, but at the station of
Empalme according to UP and Ferromex personnel. The inspection at Empalme lasts around 2- 3
hours per train and takes place before the cars leave the terminal of Empalme. Military personnel
inspect the cars while the trains are being formed at Empalme. This operation is similar to the
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 51
inspection operation of the trains performed by US Customs at Rio Rico, in the sense that there
are some cars that US Customs personnel request to be set aside for further inspections.
In order to estimate the capacity of the different components of the railroad network we used the
guidelines set forth in the study Parametric Analysis of Railway Line Capacity ( Federal Railroad
Administration, 1975), which provides a rough estimate of the capacity of uniform line segments
between rail stations. The main information that we used for our calculations included the
average speed of the trains on each particular segment, the average space between sidings, and
the type of control used to coordinate the trains. For the partition of the line segments we used the
main railroad stations, which resulted in a line segment between Nogales and Tucson, a second
one between Empalme and Hermosillo a third one between Hermosillo and Benjamin Hill and the
last one between Benjamin Hill and Nogales.
The information gathered to calculate the capacity of the railroad corresponding to Ferromex was
documented through interviews with the key Ferromex personnel involved in the operations. In
Appendix F we include some of the data provided by Ferromex. Figure 8.1, shows the capacity
and the utilization of the railway in the Ferromex part of the Corridor. In this figure the capacity
is given in trains per day and the utilization is given as a fraction of the total capacity available. In
Table 8.1 we present the results of capacity estimation for the whole Corridor. The first column
identifies each of the railroad segments in which we divided the Corridor; the second column
presents the average allowable speed for each of the segments. The third, fourth and fifth columns
shows the assumptions about block signals, length of segment and average distance between
sidings for each segment ( please refer to Appendix F). Finally columns sixth presents the
calculated capacity of the railroad ( in trains per day) and column seventh shows the current flow
through the railroad, and the last column is the current utilization of the capacity.
Figure 8.1 â€“ Utilization of the Ferromexâ€™s Tracks
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 52
As shown in Table 8.1, the capacity of the line with the current infrastructure in place can support
up to 14 trains per day in both directions. The utilization of the track was calculated based in the
current daily schedule ( 6 trains per day) for the Empalme- Benjamin Hill line and the Benjamin
Hill- Nogales line ( 6 daily trains). Thus, the highest utilization of the railroad in the Mexican side
of the railroad is in the segment between Benjamin Hill and Nogales. These segments have a
capacity of up to 13 trains per day and receive an average of 6 trains per day, then using 44% of
their current capacity.
For the UP line from Nogales to Tucson, we used the same type of information, but this time we
obtained the data that is publicly available through ADOT and the Federal Railroad
Administration ( Federal Railroad Administration, 2005), which include data on crossings and
demand. Using the same methodology that it was used to calculate the capacity for the Mexican
side of the railroad we calculated the current utilization of the railway between Nogales and
Tucson ( Figure 8.2). We obtained a rough estimation that 31% of the capacity of the line is
currently being used, assuming that the current demand is at five trains per day, although there are
reasons to believe that this level is already at six trains per day.
In order to validate our findings we presented the results of the capacity analysis to Joaquin Rojo
de la Vega, Ferromex Vice- president for the Northwest region and Bob Naro, Vice- president of
Mexico Operations of UP, during a meeting on January 5, 2006 at Tucson. While both Mr. Rojo
De la Vega and Mr. Naro in general agreed with the results presented we did not obtained a
formal technical endorsement of our findings. However, we have had additional interactions with
Ferromex personnel that served as the basis for our analysis.
Table 8.1 â€“ Capacity Estimates for Different Segments of the Railroad ( Trains per Day)
Segment Speed Block Sidings Length Capacity Volume Utilization
Enpalme- Hermosillo 43 1 45 87 14 6 42%
Hermosillo- B. H. 46 1 37 78 17 6 35%
B. H.- Nogales 38 1 44 90 14 6 44%
Nogales- Tucson 35 1 29 65 19 6 31%
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 53
The main result from the analysis of both railways is that there is still enough capacity to grow in
terms of trains per day, but we did not estimate the capacity at the main switching yards in
Empalme and Tucson. However, Ferromex personnel assured us that there was enough capacity
to support the container activities of the Port of Guaymas. We have reasons to believe that one of
the main congestion points in the binational railway corridor could be the switching yard at
Tucson, this notion was ratified after meeting with Bob Naro, however he did not express a
concern over this issue since apparently UP is already adressing this issue. Even if the numbers in
Table 8.1 change when the Ford plant in Hermosillo, Sonora is fully operational; the total
requirements from the Port of Guaymas would be two additional trains, one each way, to handle
all the different scenarios we mentioned in Section 5.
According to UP the main restriction for the operations of railroad service between Nogales and
Tucson is the operational schedule of the customs officers at the DeConcini Port of Entry and at
the site in Rio Rico ( Figure 8.3 and Figure 8.4). According to UP these inspections require
around 2- 3 hours per train. The inspection time at Rio Rico, coupled with the operating time at
the DeConcini POE ( approximately 10 hours) would reduce the amount of northbound trains to
around 3- 4 trains per day, and the same would apply for southbound trains, bringing the
maximum capacity at around eight trains per day, which is significantly less than the physical
capacity. Our estimation of the current railroad capacity is consistent with the information
provided by CBP field personnel and later corroborated by DHS personnel ( see letter in Appendix
J). However, DHS staff disputes the claim that the CBP inspections are the cause of the reduction
Figure 8.2 â€“ Utilization of UPâ€™s Tracks
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 54
of rail capacity. In a letter from Donna de la Torre, Director of Field Operations, Bureau of
Customs and Border Protection; received on April 25 of this year ( see Appendix J for a copy of
the letter), she seems to indicate that the main factors affecting the delays of the trains at the
border are the required train break check procedures, the lack of punctuality of the northbound
trains of crossing the border and the crew change that takes place at the border. Since we did not
have access to the inspection facilities, we were not able to assess the particular factors affecting
the delays. However, while not part of the scope of work of the project being reported, we
believe that a closer analysis of the railroad processing procedures is needed in order to establish
procedural and infrastructural improvements. This is left as a recommendation for further
investigation
Another issue raised by Union Pacific during the meeting was the lack of equipment in Rio Rico
to meet the inspection requirements of US customs for a double- stacked container train. For
instance, if US Customs personnel needed to inspect the contents of a container located in the
bottom of a double- stacked platform the top container would have to be lifted to allow the access
to the container at the bottom. This would considerably delay the inspection of the train, if not
making the inspection impossible because currently there is no container crane available to make
this maneuver possible. A potential way to make this inspection operation more efficient would
be to disengage the platform at the Rio Rico and allow the train to continue on to Tucson.
However, this is not feasible because the Rio Rico siding is not designed to serve as a switching
yard, for a detailed description of the operating procedure at DeConcini and Rio Rico facilities,
read Appendix D. A better alternative, that we recommend be explored in the future, is to
perform the inspection operation at Tucson. From the letter from Donna de la Torre, mentioned
above, it seems that CBP is willing to further discuss this option. This is left for further analysis.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 55
Figure 8.3 â€“ Northbound Rail Crossings at the Border ( Provided by Ferromex, 2005)
Figure 8.4 â€“ Southbound Rail Crossings at the Border ( Provided by Ferromex, 2005)
We also researched the railway in terms of existing and necessary weight and clearance capacity
to handle double stacked trains from the Port of Guaymas to the city of Tucson. From empirical
data, of the cars transported from the Ford plant in Hermosillo to Tucson, we know that currently
there is enough clearance to handle double stacked containers from Hermosillo to Tucson. Thus,
we just needed to document the segment Guaymas- Hermosillo to complete this part of the study.
We performed a physical inspection of the railroad from Hermosillo to Guaymas, documenting
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 56
the overpasses and the clearance limitations. The resulting information is shown in Table 8.2,
Table 8.3 and Figure 8.5. After getting the specifications and physically inspecting the overpasses
for the Guaymas- Nogales railway and the physical inspection of the line we could not find any
major restriction to the operation of double stacked container trains for the Guaymas- Nogales
segment.
The previous capacity analysis is based on the assumption that both companies, Ferromex and
UP, have enough equipment, i. e., engines, container platforms, etc, to make an efficient use of the
currently installed physical rail infrastructure.
A final note is regarding the effect of the additional trains on the cities of Nogales, Arizona and
Nogales, Sonora. While we did not perform a specific analysis in this regard, we made the
assumption that the additional train will have to observe the current Uniform Vehicle Code
( Federal Railroad Administration, 2006) related to not block an urban intersection for more than 5
minutes continuously. Being this the case, we believe that the marginal impact to Nogales,
Arizona should be minimal. However, a more detailed analysis could be undertaken to determine
the specific impact to Nogales, Arizona. The same conclusion could be applied to Nogales,
Sonora with one additional comment: Nogales, Sonora is also impacted by the trainâ€™s traverse by
the City. We assume that the wait of the train to cross to the US side of the border is efficient and
expedient. A more detailed analysis of the crossing operation could be performed to verify this
assumption.
Figure 8.5 - Overpasses in the Railway Guaymas- Hermosillo
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 57
8.1 Summary of Railroad Capacity Analysis
From the information gathered by interviews with Ferromex and UP and the public information
available at ADOT and the Federal Railroad Administration ( FRA), we calculated the capacity of
rail segments along the corridor and the current level of utilization of the line. The results of
obtained are presented in Figure 8.1 and Figure 8.2.
The current capacity of the railroadâ€™s physical infrastructure seems adequate to handle the service
demand imposed by the different scenarios analyzed for the operations of the Port and the
Corridor. However, this capacity seems to be restricted by the current inspection procedures and
railroad operations at the City of Nogales, AZ.
Table 8.2 â€“ Specifications for Overpasses
p p
SUBDIRECCIÃ“N DE OPERACIÃ“N
DIVISIÃ“N HERMOSILLO
GALIBOS EN EL TRAMO DE NOGALES A EMPALME, SONORA.
ALTURA DEL
HONGO DE RIEL
PUERTA DE INSPECCIÃ“N ADUANAL Km. T- 4+ 190 4.36 T ESTRUCTURA METALICA INSP. UNID.
PASO INFERIOR ENCINAS km. T- 9+ 650 8.10 6.85 T CRUCE CARRETERO
PASO INFERIOR ENCINAS Km. T- 9+ 700 8.10 6.85 T CRUCE CARRETERO
PASO INFERIOR Km. T- 150+ 033 32.00 8.40 T CRUCE PEATONAL
PASO INFERIOR PTO. GONZALITOS Km. T- 153+ 910 8.10 6.85 T CRUCE CARRETERO
PASO INFERIOR PTO. GONZALITOS Km. T- 153+ 960 8.10 7.20 T CRUCE CARRETERO
PUENTE RIO SONORA Km. T- 279+ 720 4.58 7.16 T ESTRUCTURA METALICA PASO INFERIOR
PASO INFERIOR Km. T- 409+ 937 15.60 7.54 T CRUCE CARRETERO
PASO INFERIOR Km. T- 416+ 094 23.63 7.42 T CRUCE PEATONAL
PASO INFERIOR Km. T- 422+ 300 18.00 8.60 T CRUCE CARRETERO
NOMBRE UBICACIÃ“N ANCHO LINEA OBSERVACIONES
Table 8.3 â€“ Translation of the Specifications for the Overpasses ( in feet)
Name Location Width Height Line Observations
Customs inspection Km T- 4+ 190 14.30 22.46 T Metallic structure for inspection unit
Overpass at Encinas Km T- 9+ 650 26.56 22.46 T Road crossing
Overpass at Encinas Km T- 9+ 700 59.04 22.46 T Road crossing
Overpass Km T- 50+ 033 26.56 27.55 T Pedestrian crossing
Overpass at Gonzalitos Km T- 153+ 910 104.96 22.46 T Road crossing
Overpass at Gonzalitos Km T- 153+ 960 26.56 23.61 T Road crossing
Bridge Rio Sonora Km T- 279+ 720 26.56 23.48 T Metallic structure over the bridge
Overpass Km T- 409+ 937 15.02 24.73 T Road crossing
Overpass Km T- 416+ 094 51.16 24.33 T Pedestrian crossing
Overpass Km T- 422+ 300 77.50 28.20 T Road crossing
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 58
9 Overall Corridor Analysis
The purpose of this part of the analysis is to unify the findings from the analysis of different
components of the corridor, identifying the current and potential bottlenecks for the flow of
containers from the Port of Guaymas to Tucson. At the end of this section we address some
operational and commercial issues that emanated in the course of the study, either from the
meetings we had with the different stakeholders or from information we researched.
The overall corridor analysis was divided into the following activities:
1. Identification of the most critical points, or potential bottlenecks documented in previous
studies.
2. Determination of the different scenarios for the analysis of the Corridor:
a. Current situation ( no containers moving through Guaymas).
b. Baseline for the initial operation of the Port of Guaymas.
c. Baseline with a moderate increase in the number of containers moving through
Guaymas.
3. Determination of performance measures for the analysis of the corridor.
4. Determination of the capacity and utilization of the Corridor capacity for the different
scenarios.
5. Identification of the bottlenecks for the different scenarios.
6. Proposing some potential solutions aimed at improving the overall performance of the
Corridor.
7. Analysis of complementary operational and commercial factors of the Corridor.
For the purposes of this study, we defined the logistical corridor between Guaymas and Tucson as
a Railroad and Highway corridor with multimodal connections at the Port of Guaymas and the
Port of Tucson. The first activity for this study was to identify the infrastructure currently in
place for highways, railroads and multimodal terminals.
As part of the analysis we divided the infrastructure of railroads and highways into nodes and
links. We defined links as segments of the road or railroad that have similar characteristics in
terms of infrastructure, such as lanes, cargo capacity, clearance, and so forth. Nodes were defined
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 59
as places where transfers between modes can occur or where the performance conditions are
different, such as in populated places, toll booths or ports of entry ( see Appendix E). These nodes
are primarily analyzed individually in this study.
For the overall evaluation of the corridor with the selected performance measures, we analyzed
several scenarios that are consistent across the simulations in the Mariposa POE and the Port of
Guaymas. The scenarios we explored were:
â€¢ Current conditions without container terminal in Guaymas.
â€¢ Container terminal running at the minimum required level ( 400 TEU).
o 100 % Trucks from the port
o 100 % Train from the port
o 50% Trucks and 50% Train
o 70% Trucks and 30% Train
o 30% Trucks and 70% Train
â€¢ Container terminal running at the medium level ( 1,200 TEU).
o 100 % Trucks
o 100 % Train
o 50% Trucks and 50% Train
o 70% Trucks and 30% Train
o 30% Trucks and 70% Train
â€¢ Finally with 2000 loaded TEU per week.
o 50% Trucks and 50% Trains
The capacity estimates for these scenarios are presented next.
9.1 Current Capacity and Utilization of the Corridor
As part of the activities of the study we estimated the current capacity and the utilization for the
main nodes and links for the railroads and the highways of the Corridor. The current capacities
and utilization the railroads and highways are documented in Table 9.1 and Table 9.2
respectively. These tables show that with the exception of the intersection of the highways I- 19
and I- 10 in the City of Tucson, the rest of the elements of the corridor seem to have enough
capacity for additional traffic. We believe that the lack of capacity exhibited by the I- 19 and I- 10
intersection is a transient occurrence only observed at the peak hour of the morning and afternoon
commute. Thus, we did not consider this intersection to be a bottleneck for the corridor.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 60
However, a more detailed analysis should be undertaken to determine the exact effect of
additional traffic in this segment of the highway.
Table 9.3 presents the information related to the current capacity and utilization nodes that were
not included in the previous tables. From the utilization reported in this table, and as it was
mentioned in Sections 7 and 8, the current main bottlenecks of the corridor appear to be the
inspection points at the border. Both transportation modes, rail and trucking, have their main
restrictions when crossing northbound to the US. In the case of trucks, from information provided
by CBP personnel and the simulation model, we have estimated the maximum number of trucks
that can be processed daily at Mariposa POE which under current operational schedules is around
1,500 trucks. Since, we also know that the current daily demand at the annual peak season is of
about 1,300 trucks, the most additional traffic that can be handled without significantly modifying
the current operational schedule is of about 200 trucks per day or only 104,000 TEU per year.
Also, due to inspection time requirements and railroad operations in Nogales ( see Section 8),
currently only up to 8 trains per day can cross the border, which means only one additional
northbound train per day can send through the corridor. This additional train corresponds to a
total of 120,000 TEU per year ( Table 9.3).
Table 9.1 â€“ Estimation of Capacity and Utilization of Railroads
Segment Speed Block Sidings Length Capacity Volume Utilization
Empalme- Hermosillo 43 1 45 87 14 6 42%
Hermosillo- B. H. 46 1 37 78 18 6 34%
B. H.- Nogales 38 1 44 90 14 6 44%
Nogales- Tucson 35 1 29 65 19 6 31%
Table 9.2 â€“ Estimation of Capacity and Utilization of Highways
Node Lanes Volume/ Hr Capacity Utilization
Guaymas 2 268.15 1180.33 23%
Toll 1 3 140.00 1050.00 13%
Hermosillo3 2 556.05 1142.86 49%
Toll 2 3 356.27 1050.00 34%
Benjamin Hill 2 226.17 702.00 32%
Santa Ana 2 173.71 1152.00 15%
Toll 3 3 224.00 1050.00 21%
Imuris 2 224.16 1152.00 19%
Toll 4 3 294.00 1050.00 28%
Nogales, AZ 3 872.00 1672.00 52%
Tucson 2 4283.00 4271.00 100%
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 61
The main intermodal nodes in the corridor are located in Guaymas, Hermosillo and Tucson. The
container capacity of the Port of Guaymas has already been estimated at more than 175,000 TEU
per year ( according to our simulation results) and the capacity of the Port of Tucson is at 295,000
TEU per year ( Levin, 2005). We do not have an estimate for the intermodal terminal in
Hermosillo, but since it is not economically viable to load containers in trains of cargo bound for
the Port of Guaymas or unload trains coming from Guaymas, then it is not a feasible alternative
for the corridor.
From Tables 9.1 to 9.3 we can see that the current bottlenecks of the Guaymas- Tucson corridor
correspond to the Mariposa POE, followed by the DeConcini POE/ Rio Rico and the Port of
Guaymas. We estimate the current capacity of the corridor is 175,000 TEU if both ports of entry
are operational and a railroad container service between Guaymas and Tucson is available.
However, this capacity is reduced to 104,000 TEU per year if the railroad service is not available.
On the other hand, the current capacity for the corridor would be of 120,000 TEU per year, if
only train is used to move the containers from Guaymas to Tucson. In this case, the main factor
limiting the capacity of the Corridor would be the train procedures performed at the DeConcini
Port of Entry and/ or Rio Rico facilities.
An overall summary of the Corridor capacity is offered in Table 9.4. The capacities for the
highways are given in trucks per day, which is obtained by assuming that every truck is
equivalent 1.5 passenger vehicles. For the case of the railroad the capacities are given in
containers per day, which is calculated based on the assumption of 100 cars per train with four
TEUs per car. To determine the capacity of the overall corridor we assumed an operation of the
highways and terminals of 12 hours per day, which are the hours of operation at the Mariposa
POE at maximum capacity ( From 8: 00 AM â€“ 8: 00PM). Thus, the Port of Guaymas can process
50 containers ( trucks) per hour which would be equivalent to 600 Containers per day for imports.
Table 9.3 â€“ Estimation of Capacity and Utilization of Highways
Mariposa Guaymas Port of Tucson Nogales
Capacity 1,500 600 640 400
TEU 3,000 1,020 1,114 1,600
Days 260 172 300 300
Cap TEU 780,000 175,440 334,000 480,000
Current 676,000 0 30,000 360,000
Available 104,000 175,440 304,000 120,000
Utilization 87% 0% 9% 75%
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 62
If the reader needs to reconcile these numbers to TEU, the ratio of TEU to container is 1.74, using
a mix of 20â€™ and 40â€™ containers of 26- 74% respectively.
From the previous discussion, from a physical infrastructure perspective, we believe that the
current capacity of the Guaymas- Tucson is 175,000 TEU per year if both rail and truck service to
move containers between Guaymas and Tucson are available. Thus, we believe the current
unavailability of efficient rail service to move containers between Guaymas and Tucson is a very
important limiting factor for the operation of the Corridor.
9.2 Utilization of the Corridor with a Terminal Container at Guaymas
In this sub- section we perform an abbreviated sensitivity analysis to revise our estimates of
capacity for the different elements of the Corridor to reflect the operation of a container terminal
in the Port of Guaymas. We used the output from the simulation of the Port of Guaymas as input
for the rest of the corridor, with a similar procedure as we did with the simulation for the
Mariposa POE. For example in one of the scenarios the demand for the highway would be
increased by 239 containers per day, which adds 239 more trucks to the current average daily
flow of the Corridor. For the case of the trains we estimated that one additional train in both
directions ( northbound and southbound) should be more than enough for handling all the
Table 9.4 â€“ Current and Available Daily Capacity of the Overall Corridor
Corridor
Components
Higway Capacity Used Available Railroad Capacity Used Available Capacity Used Available
Links Links
Guay- Empalme 9,664 3,157 6,507 Guay- Empalme 1400 200 1200 11,064 3,357 7,707
Empalme- Her 26,650 3,142 23,508 Empalme- Her 1400 600 800 28,050 3,742 24,308
Her- B. H. 22,204 5,026 17,178 Her- B. H. 1600 600 1000 23,804 5,626 18,178
B. H.- Imuris 26,057 2,034 24,023 B. H.- Nog 1400 600 800 27,457 2,634 24,823
Imuris- Nog 17,818 2,322 15,496 17,818 2,322 15,496
Nog- Mariposa 28,082 3,524 24,558 28,082 3,524 24,558
Mariposa- I19 32,464 13,828 18,636 32,464 13,828 18,636
I19- Tucson 30,464 26,092 4,372 Nog- Tucson 1800 600 1200 32,264 26,692 5,572
Nodes Nodes
Guaymas Port* 600 0 600 Guaymas Port 0 0 600 0 600
Hermosillo 9,143 5,004 4,139 9,143 5,004 4,139
Guaymas 9,440 2,358 7,082 9,440 2,358 7,082
Santa Ana 9,216 1,566 7,650 9,216 1,566 7,650
Mariposa 1,500 1,296 204 Nogales, AZ 800 600 200 2,300 1,896 404
Nogales, AZ 13,376 7,429 5,947 13,376 7,429 5,947
Port of Tucson 640 100 540 640 100 540
Tucson** 34,168 35,635 0 34,168 35,635 0
Total 1,500 1,296 204 800 600 200 2,300 1,896 404
Modal Capacity Modal Capacity Overall Corridor
* Assuming a terminal with two quay cranes in Guaymas.
+ We assume also 12 hours to convert to a capacity per day.
+ With 100 cars per train and 2 Containers ( 40') per car.
** Capacity estimation at peak hour, since is a transient occurrence, we do not consider this a hard bottleneck.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 63
containers coming in and out of the port for all the different scenarios ( Table 9.5). Another
motivation for programming a daily train is to reduce the waiting time for containers leaving the
port by rail. However, we need to mention that the addition of one train in each direction would
represent a worse case scenario in terms of the rail capacity needed.
With the additional demand, the effects on the highways are between 1- 2% of increase in the
utilization ( volume/ capacity) of the different segments ( Table 9.6). Thus, we conclude that given
this minor increase, the operation of the port at the levels selected in the simulation would not
significantly impact the highways. The main constraints for the highways are the inspection
points at Benjamin Hill and the Mariposa POE. From the results of the simulation the nominal
utilization for the Mariposa POE would increase to over 100% ( see Table 6.2). In theory, this is
not possible. However, our assumption is that this over utilization would be addressed by
increasing the operating hours of the POE, as it is currently done to process the produce at the
peak of the harvesting season. We estimate that the additional time to process the added traffic
would be of around two hours. These estimations are based on the results provided by the
simulation model which was built on data provided by CBP personnel. We recommend that a
more detailed analysis of Mariposa POE is undertaken to verify our findings and to analyze
improvements.
Table 9.5 â€“ Capacity and Utilization with a Container Terminal in Guaymas
Segment Speed Block Sidings Length Capacity Volume Utilization
Empalme- Hermosillo 43 1 45 87 14 8 56%
Hermosillo- B. H. 46 1 37 78 18 8 46%
B. H.- Nogales 38 1 44 90 14 8 58%
Nogales- Tucson 35 1 29 65 19 8 42%
Table 9.6 â€“ Capacity and Utilization with Terminal in Guaymas
Node Lanes Volume/ Hr Capacity Utilization
Guaymas 2 280.72 1180.33 24%
Toll 1 3 140.00 1050.00 13%
Hermosillo3 2 567.10 1142.86 49%
Toll 2 3 366.02 1050.00 35%
Benjamin Hill 2 238.49 702.00 34%
Santa Ana 2 182.78 1152.00 15%
Toll 3 3 234.17 1050.00 22%
Imuris 2 234.17 1152.00 19%
Toll 4 3 308.50 1050.00 29%
Nogales, AZ 3 889.85 1672.00 53%
Tucson 2 4298.00 4271.00 101%
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 64
For the case of the railroad, the increased demand would require two more trains going through
the corridor, one going south from Tucson to Guaymas and one going north from Guaymas to
Tucson. This flow would generate a utilization ( volume/ capacity) of the physical capacity of the
railroad of up to 58 %, and a full utilization of the railroad facilities at Nogales, AZ ( DeConcini
and Rio Rico). For this mode of transportation would be a substantial change from the current
levels, however in terms of physical capacity this number would still be manageable..
Another analysis consisted on determining the Average Travel Time ( ATT). The ATT was
calculated according to the data provided by several carriers and shippers that currently use the
corridor ( Table 9.7), to this time we added the waiting time at the border ( Cano, 2005; Roy, 2005;
Maldonado, 2005). The traveling time in the table assumes a waiting time of one hour at
Benjamin Hill, which is the normal waiting time during off- peak season, however this estimate
may be revised in the future since we have information that this time can be up to 3.5 hours in the
peak season.
The estimated travel time by highway is based on average travel speeds provided by interviewed
companies and by the maximum allowed speeds in different roads in the US and Mexico. We also
included inspection times in Mexico and at the border. The summary of these results is presented
in Table 9.7.
In the case of the railroad, the travel time was calculated based on historical information for the
year 2005 provided by Ferromex ( Ferromex, 2006). For the UP line we estimated the time with
the reported travel speeds, schedules and waiting time at the border ( UP, 2006; Association of
American Railroads, 2006). One limitation of this approach is that we are not taking into account
the waiting time of trains at the UP stations, since we did not have actual the performance reports
of the trains in these routes, so the traveling time of the railroad in the US might be
underestimated. However, for the Mexican railroad we have historical reports provided by
Ferromex, and their performance of trains traveling from Empalme to Nogales takes an average
Table 9.7 â€“ Average Transit Times by Truck
Travel Time ( Hours)
Highway Hermosillo Nogales Tucson Phoenix El Paso Chicago
Guaymas 2 6* 9** 11 14 35
Hermosillo 0 4.5 7** 9 12 33
Tucson 6 1 0 2 5 26
Long Beach 7 8 7 5.5 12 30
* Assuming an average of one hour of inspection at Benjamin Hill.
** Assuming one hour of waiting time at the border.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 65
of 14 hours with a standard deviation of around 2 hours. The summary of the travel information
without is presented on Table 9.8.
We added the waiting time of the containers at the port to the regular traveling speed to get an
estimate of the time it takes for a container to travel all the way to Tucson once it has arrived at
the Port of Guaymas.
9.3 Complementary Analysis
Since currently there is not a container service between Guaymas and Tucson and it is not clear if
and when this service will be offered we did a very preliminary analysis of the current cost of
transportation of containers from the Port of Guaymas to Tucson and Phoenix.
Since currently there are no railroad services to transport containers from the Port of Guaymas to
Tucson we wanted to investigate the commercial feasibility of using truck instead. In order to
pursue this goal, we obtained cost information from two different trucking companies for
transporting a 40â€™ container from the Port of Guaymas to Tucson and Phoenix. The prices that we
obtained from these companies were of around $ 1,300 to move a container from Guaymas to
T

Copyright to this resource is held by the creating agency and is provided here for educational purposes only. I may not be downloaded, reproduced, or distributed in any format without written permission of the creating agency. Any attempt to circumvent the access controls placed on this file is a violation of United States and international copyright laws, and is subject to criminal prosecution

A Report to the Arizona Department of Transportation
Logistics Capacity Study of the
Guaymas- Tucson Corridor
J. RenÃ Villalobos, Arnold Maltz*, Omar Ahumada, Gerardo
TreviÃ±o, Octavio SÃ¡nchez, Hugo C. GarcÃ a
Department of Industrial Engineering
Ira A. Fulton School of Engineering
* Department of Supply Chain
WP Carey School of Business
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 1
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................... 1
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... ..... 3
List of Tables......................................................................................................................... ............. 5
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ 6
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 9
2 Refinement of Tasks ................................................................................................................ 11
3 Documentation of Previous Studies Related with the Corridor.............................................. 12
3.1 Summary of Literature Review....................................................................................... 14
4 Establishing a Baseline of Cargo for the Container Terminal ................................................ 15
4.1 Summary of Baseline Analysis....................................................................................... 22
5 Analysis of the Port of Guaymas............................................................................................. 23
5.1 Inventory of the Current Infrastructure........................................................................... 23
5.2 The Simulation Model..................................................................................................... 26
5.3 Summary of the Infrastructure of the Port of Guaymas................................................. 35
6 Analysis of the Mariposa Port of Entry................................................................................... 36
6.1 Summary of the Analysis................................................................................................ 43
7 Analysis of Highway Infrastructure Supporting the Port of Guaymas................................... 44
7.1 Summary of Highway Capacity...................................................................................... 49
8 Analysis of Railroad Infrastructure Supporting the Port ........................................................ 50
8.1 Summary of Railroad Capacity Analysis ....................................................................... 57
9 Overall Corridor Analysis........................................................................................................ 58
9.1 Current Capacity and Utilization of the Corridor........................................................... 59
9.2 Utilization of the Corridor with a Terminal Container at Guaymas.............................. 62
9.3 Complementary Analysis................................................................................................ 65
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 2
9.4 Summary of Findings...................................................................................................... 66
10 Recommended Activities ......................................................................................................... 69
10.1 Refinement of the Capacity Study.................................................................................. 69
10.2 Identification of Infrastructure Improvements and their Effects ................................... 69
10.3 Identification of Comparative Logistics/ Supply Chain Advantages of the Use of the
Port of Guaymas ........................................................................................................................... 70
10.4 Determination of Potential Commercial of the Corridor ............................................... 70
10.5 Matching the Logistics Advantages with Appropriate Industry Segments ................... 70
10.6 Exploration of Opportunities of Collaboration for Value Added Activities in the Port
of Guaymas........................................................................................................................ .......... 70
10.7 Preparation of a Strategic Road Map for the Development of the Corridor.................. 71
11 References ............................................................................................................................... 72
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 3
List of Figures
Figure 4.1 â€“ Maritime Routes........................................................................................................... 19
Figure 4.2 â€“ Origin of Containers..................................................................................................... 20
Figure 4.3 â€“ Destination of Containers ............................................................................................ 20
Figure 4.4 â€“ International Origin of Containers............................................................................... 21
Figure 5.1â€“ Master Plan of the Port of Guaymas............................................................................. 24
Figure 5.2 â€“ Handling Equipment at the Port of Guaymas.............................................................. 26
Figure 5.3 â€“ Distribution of Maximum Draft................................................................................... 26
Figure 5.4 â€“ Screen of the Simulation Program............................................................................... 28
Figure 5.5 â€“ Vessel Turnaround Time.............................................................................................. 32
Figure 5.6 â€“ Vessel Turnaround Time.............................................................................................. 32
Figure 5.7 â€“ Container Time in System ........................................................................................... 34
Figure 5.8 â€“ Container Time in System ........................................................................................... 34
Figure 6.1 â€“ Mariposa POE Simulation Input.................................................................................. 36
Figure 6.2 â€“ Mariposa POE Simulation Process Map ..................................................................... 37
Figure 6.3 â€“ Graphical Interface of the Simulation Program for the Mariposa POE...................... 38
Figure 6.4 â€“ Average Truck Time in System................................................................................... 41
Figure 6.5 â€“ Average Trucks Time in System per Scenario............................................................ 41
Figure 6.6 â€“ Required Operational Hours to Clear Compound ....................................................... 42
Figure 7.1 â€“ GIS Map of the Corridor under Study......................................................................... 44
Figure 7.2 â€“ Highway Capacity in Arizona...................................................................................... 46
Figure 7.3 â€“ Highway Capacity in Sonora ....................................................................................... 47
Figure 7.4 â€“ Mexican Highway Inspection ...................................................................................... 47
Figure 8.1 â€“ Utilization of the Ferromexâ€™s Tracks........................................................................... 51
Figure 8.2 â€“ Utilization of UPâ€™s Tracks ........................................................................................... 53
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 4
Figure 8.3 â€“ Northbound Rail Crossings at the Border ( Provided by Ferromex, 2005)................. 55
Figure 8.4 â€“ Southbound Rail Crossings at the Border ( Provided by Ferromex, 2005)................. 55
Figure 9.1 â€“ Rail- Truck Intermodal Traffic in the United States: 1980- 2004 ................................ 66
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 5
List of Tables
Table 4.1 â€“ Comparison of the Three Ports ..................................................................................... 16
Table 4.2 â€“ Comparison of the Three Ports in Terms of Equipment............................................... 17
Table 4.3 â€“ Distances and Time from Guaymas.............................................................................. 18
Table 5.1 â€“ Berths Dimensions......................................................................................................... 24
Table 5.2 â€“ Relevant Information Summary.................................................................................... 25
Table 5.3 â€“ Infrastructure between the Current State and the Simulated Scenarios ....................... 27
Table 5.4 â€“ Scenarios Analyzed for the Operation of the Port of Guaymas ................................... 30
Table 5.5 â€“ Results for the Scenarios Analyzed for the Operation of the Port ............................... 31
Table 6.1 â€“ Information Used for Each Scenario for the Mariposa POE........................................ 39
Table 6.2 â€“ Results of Running the Simulation of the POE ............................................................ 40
Table 7.1 â€“ Capacity Estimates for the different nodes in PCPH.................................................... 48
Table 8.1 â€“ Capacity Estimates for Different Segments of the Railroad ( Trains per Day) ............ 52
Table 8.2 â€“ Specifications for Overpasses ....................................................................................... 57
Table 8.3 â€“ Translation of the Specifications for the Overpasses ( in feet) ..................................... 57
Table 9.1 â€“ Estimation of Capacity and Utilization of Railroads.................................................... 60
Table 9.2 â€“ Estimation of Capacity and Utilization of Highways................................................... 60
Table 9.3 â€“ Estimation of Capacity and Utilization of Highways................................................... 61
Table 9.4 â€“ Current and Available Daily Capacity of the Overall Corridor ................................... 62
Table 9.5 â€“ Capacity and Utilization with a Container Terminal in Guaymas ............................... 63
Table 9.6 â€“ Capacity and Utilization with Terminal in Guaymas ................................................... 63
Table 9.7 â€“ Average Transit Times by Truck .................................................................................. 64
Table 9.8 â€“ Average Transit Times by Railroad .............................................................................. 65
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 6
Executive Summary
This document provides the final report of the activities performed under the project Logistics
Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor sponsored by the Arizona Department of
Transportation ( ADOT) under Grant JPA 06- 001T. Some of the findings in this document
include:
â€¢ From an infrastructure perspective, we believe that the Port of Guaymas, with some
minor improvements, such as the acquisition of additional container- moving equipment,
is ready to start a container service comparable to other Mexican regional ports, such as
the Port of Mazatlan and Ensenada.
â€¢ However, the main limitation of the port capacity is the current unavailability of quay
cranes. This precludes the Port of Guaymas from being able to offer efficient turnaround
services to modern container ships that are not geared with their own cranes. This
constraint may limit the potential of the Port of Guaymas to serve as an efficient gateway
port for container service beyond the local region. In order to provide this service we
believe that at least two quay cranes are needed, since just one quay crane would not
provide enough capacity to make the loading and unloading of containers from the
vessels more expedient. The exact capacity and characteristics of the quay cranes and
related issues, such as the need for reinforcement of the piloting system of the port is
beyond the scope of this study.
â€¢ We estimate that the current main bottlenecks of the physical infrastructure of the
corridor, in order of their impact, are: Mariposa Port of Entry ( POE), the railroad
inspection procedures at the US side of the border and the Port of Guaymas. These
points need to be further studied to verify our findings and to recommend potential
improvements if an increase of the current capacity of the Corridor is desired.
â€¢ We estimate the current capacity of the Guaymas- Tucson multimodal corridor to be
175,000 TEU ( twenty- foot equivalent units) per year if both, Mariposa and DeConcini,
ports of entry are operational, and a railroad container service between Guaymas and
Tucson is available. However, this capacity is reduced to 104,000 TEU per year if a
railroad service is not available. On the other hand, the current capacity for the corridor
would be of 120,000 TEU per year, if only rail is used to move the containers from
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 7
Guaymas to Tucson. In this case, the main factor limiting the capacity of the Corridor
would be the train inspection procedures performed at the DeConcini Port of Entry and/ or
Rio Rico facilities.
â€¢ After getting historical data of the usage of the railroad tracks, physically inspecting and
analyzing the specifications of the overpasses for the Empalme- Hermosillo railroad
segment we could not find any physical obstacle to the operation of double stacked
container trains from Guaymas to Tucson.
â€¢ A major obstacle for the viable operation of the Guaymas- Arizona container service is
the lack of a provider of an integrated service that includes shipping lines, railroads and
freight forwarding services. In order to make possible this integrated service it is first
necessary to have an integrated railroad service for containers between Guaymas and
Arizona. In this regard, we were unable to get precise information from the US rail
company providing the service, i. e. Union Pacific, on what are the necessary or sufficient
conditions â€“ commercial or operational; to service the potential containers generated by
the Port of Guaymas. We believe that the railroad companies are indispensable for the
creation of an economically feasible container corridor between the Port of Guaymas and
Arizona. Thus, these companies must be encouraged to take an active role in the
activation of a container service in the Corridor.
â€¢ Input from United States ( US) rail and truck managers suggest that process changes to
make border crossing times more predictable would be very useful in facilitating efficient
services to and from Guaymas.
â€¢ We believe that even if container traffic were attracted to the port, US railroads would
primarily be interested in Midwest- East destined freight, while Ferromex is willing to
handle shorter haul business.
â€¢ In our analysis, we have made assumptions about the type of infrastructure and level of
service needed to attract a shipping line to establish a port of call by a major container
shipping line. However, the exact needs in terms of service and demand should be
explored with the shipping companies. This assignment is left as part of the proposed
second phase of this study.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 8
â€¢ An issue that needs to be addressed as soon as possible is the lack of a regularly
scheduled container service to the Port of Guaymas. While the analysis of the
requirements to attract a major shipping line to the port was beyond the scope this study,
we believe that the geographical position of Guaymas may be an issue to attract, in the
short term, a company to provide direct service to Asia. However, we believe that the
Port of Guaymas is well positioned to serve as a regional port. For instance, it may be
appropriate for Guaymas to concentrate initially on operating as a feeder port for Sonora
destined business until regular longer- haul business is instituted by the steamship lines
and efficient rail service for containers is secured.
â€¢ From the review of previous studies we found nineteen reports related, directly or
indirectly, to the Corridor. The main emphasis of these studies is on the infrastructure
issues on the border ports of entry and between Nogales, AZ and Tucson; as well as
current and potential congestion on the highway Interstate 10 ( I- 10). However, we did not
find any study that directly documented the overall capacity or the competitiveness of the
Guaymas- Tucson Corridor.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 9
1 Introduction
This report documents the findings of the activities performed under ADOT Grant ( JPA 06-
001T). The description of the study is included as Appendix A of this report. The overall
proposed study was divided into two phases. The objectives of these phases can be summarized
as follows:
â€¢ Phase I
o Make an inventory and summarize the available relevant studies that have been
performed on the corridor.
o Perform a quick operational assessment of the current capability of the Guaymas-
Tucson corridor, in terms of Twenty- Foot Equivalent Units ( TEU) that the
corridor can currently handle.
o Provide preliminary recommendations for future investments, by identifying
current and potential bottlenecks of the corridor, the projects required for solving
those bottlenecks and the priority of those projects based on the overall benefits
for the corridor.
o Provide comments on the general feasibility of the Arizona- Guaymas corridor.
â€¢ Phase II
o Expand the study to include prescriptive recommendations in terms of logistics
and security practices for the port, which will allow it to become globally
competitive as a small container port.
o Identify how the Port of Guaymas can serve as a strategic point of collaboration
between Arizona and Sonora. The benefits of this collaboration might include an
increase in the competitiveness of the corridor and attracting higher value added
operations to the region.
This report covers the activities performed for Phase I which is the only part funded by Arizona
Department of Transportation ( ADOT); and it covers the period from August 1, 2005 to April 15,
2006.
According to the approved statement of work, the tasks to be conducted as part of Phase I
included the following:
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 10
1. Identification, assessment, and classification of previous studies dealing with the
corridor.
2. Refinement of tasks to be performed in Phase I.
3. Documentation of current conditions of the Port of Guaymas.
4. Identification of the major infrastructure components of the transportation network
between the Port of Guaymas and Tucson.
5. Documentation of the capacity of each of the infrastructure components.
6. Determination of a baseline cargo scenario for the container terminal.
7. Determination of expected transit times between the cities of Guaymas and Tucson.
8. Identification of the bottlenecks and potential improvements in the Corridorsâ€™ railroad
and highway.
9. Preparation of scope of work for Phase II.
In the rest of this report we provide a brief summary of the activities performed to accomplish
these tasks.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 11
2 Refinement of Tasks
The proposed initial tasks to conduct the Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson
Corridor were presented to the Technical Advisory Committee ( TAC) in the inter- plenary
meeting of September 30, 2005. Based on feedback from the TAC members these tasks were
approved in the TAC meeting that took place on November 22, 2005, at Arizona State University
( ASU).
After the objectives were approved by the TAC we developed a set of detailed activities required
to complete the scope of work for the project. These activities were:
â€¢ Documentation of previous studies related with the corridor.
â€¢ Establishing a baseline of cargo for the container terminal.
â€¢ Analysis of the current infrastructure of the Port of Guaymas.
â€¢ Analysis of capacity and demand at the Nogales Port of Entry.
â€¢ Review of highway infrastructure along the Corridor.
â€¢ Review of railroad infrastructure along the Corridor.
â€¢ Overall Corridor analysis.
â€¢ Definition of scope of work of future activities.
The remainder of this report is organized according to these activities.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 12
3 Documentation of Previous Studies Related with the Corridor
The main purpose of this activity was to identify the previous studies having a direct or indirect
relation with the Sonora- Arizona corridor so that no redundant work would be done. In order to
document and analyze the previous studies dealing with the corridor we did the following:
1. Identification of related previous projects with the help of ADOT in USA and SecretarÃ a
de Comunicaciones y Transportes ( SCT) in Mexico.
2. Reading the projects and develop a matrix that includes the documents researched and
their relevant contributions to the current project.
3. Developing a summary of the findings from the past projects.
4. Identification of those areas that have not been covered by previous projects.
5. Incorporation, if feasible, of the identified areas into the current project.
As an initial activity of the Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor, previous
studies were identified, gathered, and summarized. The studies were identified through literature
search using citation indices and internet tools, from recommendations from the TAC members,
from people with experience in the region, and from citations from the studies themselves. The
following is the list of the studies reviewed:
1. Latin American Trade and Transportation Study ( 1997).
2. Arizona Port Efficiency Study ( 1997).
3. Impacts of Transportation and Education Policy on Trade and Development in the
Arizona- Sonora Region ( 1998).
4. Arizona Trade Corridor Study ( 1999).
5. Arizona Rail Plan ( 2000).
6. US- Mexico Border: Better Planning, Coordination Needed to Handle Growing
Commercial Traffic ( 2000).
7. Intelligent Transportation Systems at International Borders ( 2001).
8. The CANAMEX Corridor Coalition ( 2001).
9. Arizonaâ€™s Border Issues ( 2002).
10. Nogales International Airport Master Plan ( 2002).
11. Nogales CyberPort Project: Comprehensive Report ( 2003).
12. Arizonaâ€™s Global Gateway ( 2003).
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 13
13. The National I- 10 Freight Corridor Study ( 2003).
14. Transportation/ Logistics Research Project: Trade Flow Study ( 2004).
15. Move Arizona ( 2004).
16. Guaymas Master Development Plan ( 2005).
17. Mariposa US Port of Entry Feasibility Study ( 2005).
18. Nogales Railroad Assessment Study ( 2005).
19. Container Port Capacity Survey ( 2005).
One of the tasks included in the Phase I, was to compile a summary of the previous studies ( see
Appendix B â€“ Study Master List). The project team elected to summarize previous findings using
two instruments:
â€¢ An Excel matrix.
â€¢ A written summary of the previous studies.
These two instruments are described next:
An Excel matrix was prepared with the various studies across the top, and relevant information
possibilities in the first vertical column. The Excel matrix ( Appendix C) has four separate sheets
â€“ Actual Flows, Forecast Flows, Process, and Infrastructure â€“ and the different sheets may
reference different information. If a particular study contained relevant information, the date of
the information is indicated. For example, the Cyberport Study was completed in 2003, so the
actual flow data is labeled 1994- 2002. Note that the dates generally refer to the underlying data,
rather than the publication date of the specific study. If date ranges are noted, the study includes
historical data and/ or forecasts for multiple years.
A summary of each study was prepared that describes the main elements of the document and
indicates the findings that seem to be relevant to this project. Where appropriate, tables of
contents and lists of tables have been copied from the studies for the convenience of the user of
this report. It is suggested that readers first look at the matrix to see which studies may contain
relevant data, and then go either to the study summaries or the studies themselves to find specific
flows, process descriptions, or infrastructure descriptions and suggestions. The written summary
is included as Appendix B of this report.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 14
3.1 Summary of Literature Review
Nineteen studies having a direct or indirect relation to demand and capabilities of the Port of
Guaymas were reviewed, as well as studies of the logistics network which includes the city of
Guaymas. These studies document the lack of growth since 1998 at the Nogales, AZ gateway
which is the entry point for United States destination traffic unloaded at Guaymas. Only one
study directly examined the Port of Guaymas time and cost competitiveness with Californiaâ€™s
Port of Long Beach, but several of the studies document the need for improvements to the border
crossing process at Nogales, both rail and truck. A number of the studies detail the infrastructure
between Nogales, AZ and Tucson, AZ; as well as current and potential congestion on I- 10. The
studies show that while there is substantial North- South traffic between Sonora and Arizona, the
East- West volume through Arizona is larger at this time.
Finally, we did not find any study that documented the competitiveness of the Guaymas- Arizona
corridor from the perspective of overall logistics costs nor its overall capacity.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 15
4 Establishing a Baseline of Cargo for the Container Terminal
Since the Port of Guaymas does not currently have a scheduled container service from any steam
shipping line we had to establish a hypothetical minimum number of containers upon which to
base the overall analysis of the corridor. In order to establish this baseline the following activities
were planned:
1. Deciding the minimum demand of TEU necessary to schedule a regular stop at the port.
2. Determining a most likely and an optimistic scenario of TEU demand once the Port of
Guaymas starts receiving container traffic.
3. Researching the preliminary requirements necessary ( in TEU) to attract a container
service company, schedule a stop at the Port of Guaymas.
Regarding activity 3, it was preliminarily established that a weekly demand of 400 TEU would
provide the minimum number of containers to be attractive for a shipping company to make a
regular stop in the Port of Guaymas. At the same time this number of TEU represents the
equivalent of a weekly unit train from the Port of Guaymas to Tucson. We believe that the
potential use of a unit container train would help to make the project attractive for Union Pacific
( UP) and Ferromex. In addition, 400 TEU per week is also comparable to the current level of
business that some shipping companies currently have in other Mexican ports. In this regard, the
Ports of Ensenada and Mazatlan were used as direct benchmark references for the potential
container business of Port of Guaymas.
The Port of Mazatlan provides a good baseline to analyze Guaymas from the perspective of the
current level of port infrastructure. It also provides a good reference point as a regional Mexican
port that aims at servicing the local needs and still be attractive enough for international shipping
liners to make a regularly scheduled stop in this port. The Port of Mazatlan does not currently
have what would be considered a full fledged container terminal â€“ i. e., it lacks the quay, sea- to-shore,
cranes needed to provide efficient service to the newer container ships. Instead, it bases its
service on the availability of container ships geared with their own cranes to unload the
containers to the port. According to official SCT data ( Direccion General de Puertos, 2005), in
the year 2004 the Port of Mazatlan handled a load of containers equivalent to 15,954 TEU â€“ cargo
roughly equivalent to 320 TEU per week. This level of business is high enough to make it
attractive for new shipping companies to establish regularly scheduled container service to the
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 16
port. For instance, CP Ships has recently restarted its service to Mazatlan with two ships: TMM
Hidalgo and Lykes Racer. Each ship has an approximate capacity of 1,700 TEU ( Administracion
Portuaria Integral de Mazatlan, 2005).
In our view, the Port of Ensenada represents what the Port of Guaymas should aim to pursue in
the short to mid term time horizon. The Port of Ensenada has a fully functional container terminal
with four quay cranes. Based on conversations with personnel of Ensenada ( Jauregui, 2005) we
estimated that the different shipping companies providing container service to this port handle an
average of 300 TEU per week. According to official SCT data ( Direccion General de Puertos,
2005) the Port of Ensenada processed 39,202 TEU in 2004 and was expected to process over
65,000 TEU in 2005. This is roughly equivalent to 784 and 1,300 TEU per week respectively.
Table 4.1 and Table 4.2 provide a quick comparison of the three ports in terms of navigational
and docking facilities ( Administracion Portuaria Integral de Mazatlan ( 2005), Administracion
Portuaria Integral de Guaymas ( 2005b) and Administracion Portuaria Integral de Ensenada
( 2005)).
Table 4.1 â€“ Comparison of the Three Ports
Description Guaymas Mazatlan Ensenada
Approach Channel Depth ( mts) 12.3 12 12
Number Container Berths 3* 4** 2
Length, Depth of Berth 1 ( mts) 177, 11 160.25, 8.5 ( draft) 182.3, 10
Length, Depth of Berth 2 ( mts) 200, 11 165.45, 10 ( draft) 300, 15
Length, Depth of Berth 3 ( mts) 177, 11 356.12, 10.5 ( draft) --
Length, Depth of Berth 4 ( mts) -- 144.2, 10.0 ( draft) --
* The Port has currently 6 positions, 3 have been identified for container operations but will become 2 per the Master Plan
** These are general cargo docks
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 17
From the previous tables, the main differences between the ports are the equipment and the
dimensions of the docking facilities. For instance, the Port of Ensenada has the advantage of
having four sea- to- shore quay cranes and a depth of 15 meters in one of the docks. However, the
access channel has a depth of 12 meters which limits the capacity of the vessels that the port can
receive. A major shortcoming of the Port of Ensenada is that it is not serviced by rail. Thus, all
the incoming containers leave the Port by truck. This is not a major shortcoming for the current
operations of the port since, from our conversations with the personnel of the Port of Ensenada
( Jauregui, 2005), most of the cargo passing through Ensenada has as its main origin or destination
the closeby City of Tijuana, in particular the maquiladora industry of Tijuana. Currently, only a
very small portion of the containers cross the border into the United States. Thus, the main driver
behind the growth of cargo being handled in Ensenada has been the regional economy. In fact,
the operator of the container terminal is using a marketing strategy focusing on the maquiladora
industry, its high productivity and reliability ( Jauregui, 2005). However, the Port of Ensenada
has been able to capture some of the container cargo originating in Sonora and destined to the Far
East.
The conclusion that we can draw from the previous discussion is that, apart from the availability
of the quay cranes, the three ports are not very different from each other in terms of port
infrastructure. The Mazatlan and Ensenada ports have been able to base their operations on the
cargo generated by the regional economy and have not only been able to survive, but also, in the
case of Ensenada, experience high levels of growth ( Direccion General de Puertos, 2004). The
question that needs to be asked is whether the regional economy of Sonora can support the
Table 4.2 â€“ Comparison of the Three Ports in Terms of Equipment
Description Capacity Guaymas Mazatlan Ensenada
Container Quay Cranes -- 0 0 4
Container Yard Crane 35 Tons 1 -- --
Container Yard Crane 40 Tons 1 -- 2
Forklifts ( all) > 45,000 lbs -- 3 4
Forklifts 35,000 lbs -- 1 --
Forklifts 30,000 lbs -- 3 --
Forklifts 20,000 lbs -- 1 --
Forklifts 15,000 lbs 6 -- 4
Forklifts < 8,000 lbs 16 -- 13
Crane 20 Tons 1 -- 3
Spreaders > 45,000 lbs 0 3 --
Chassis 20 Tons 5 7 --
Chassis 40 Tons 2 -- --
Trucks -- 3 7 8
Container Shuttle ( hustlers) -- 5 14 --
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 18
operations of a regularly scheduled container service. While in this phase of the study we do not
attempt to answer this question specifically, based on the level of development of the regions of
influence of the ports of Ensenada and Mazatlan, we operate under the assumption that the
answer to this question is affirmative and what remains to be determined is the level of cargo that
would be sufficient to entice a steam shipping line to start a regular container service to Guaymas.
We assumed that this level ( 400 TEU per week) should be higher than the current levels of cargo
handled in either Mazatlan or Ensenada by the average shipping company. This assumption was
supported from information provided by the shipping lines to Jose Luis Iberri, Director of the Port
of Guaymas ( Iberri, 2005). The reason for this assumption is that stopping in Guaymas represents
a significant deviation from the current regularly scheduled maritime routes for container service.
Table 4.3 provides the distances and navigation time from Guaymas and other ports of interest.
One of the important points to consider is what maritime routes to target to entice to stop in
Guaymas. Some of the most common maritime routes servicing the West coast of Mexico are
depicted in Figure 4.1 taken from the web site of the Port of Ensenada
( http:// www. puertoensenada. com. mx/ principales_ rutas. html).
Table 4.3 â€“ Distances and Time from Guaymas
Distance ( Nautical Miles)
Port Long Beach Ensenada Mazatlan Manzanillo Guaymas
Long Beach 0 139 1006 1206 1150
Ensenada 139 0 893 1069 1026
Mazatlan 1006 893 0 293 385
Manzanillo 1206 1069 293 0 656
Guaymas 1150 1026 385 656 0
Time ( Hours)
Port Long Beach Ensenada Mazatlan Manzanillo Guaymas
Long Beach -- 6 â€“ 10 41 -- 68 49 â€“ 81 46 â€“ 77
Ensenada 6 -- 10 -- 36 -- 60 43 â€“ 72 42 â€“ 69
Mazatlan 41 -- 68 36 â€“ 60 -- 12 â€“ 20 16 â€“ 26
Manzanillo 49 -- 81 43 â€“ 72 12 -- 20 -- 27 â€“ 44
Guaymas 46 -- 77 42 â€“ 69 16 -- 26 27 â€“ 44 --
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 19
Notice that a common practice is to
service the ports of Manzanillo and
Ensenada using the same route
( Figure 4.1). If a shipping company
were to include Guaymas in this route,
between calls to Manzanillo and
Ensenada, this would represent a
deviation of about 613 nautical miles,
or between 26 and 41 hours of
additional navigational time,
depending on the speed of the vessel.
Thus, it is significantly different if, for
instance, Mazatlan were to be
included in a scheduled route, since it
would imply only 117 additional
nautical miles or between 5 and 8
hours of navigation. Consequently,
the cargo necessary to justify a stop in
Guaymas should be higher than that
available in Mazatlan.
Currently there are two shipping lines servicing the Port of Mazatlan: Mediterranean Shipping
Company ( MSC) and CP Ships. Based on information provided by Mexicoâ€™s SCT
( Administracion Portuaria Integral de Mazatlan, 2005) we estimated that the number of TEU for
the year 2005 was slightly below 20,000. This is roughly equivalent to 400 TEU per week and
133 TEU per week per company. We also note the origin of the traffic through Mazatlan.
According to official SCT data for 2004 Sonora generates about 40% of all the cargo that is
exported in containers and about 11% of all the cargo that is imported in containers through the
Port of Mazatlan ( Direccion General de Puertos, 2005). Using these figures we estimate that
around 2,500 of the containers handled by the port of Mazatlan in the year 2004 were generated
by the state of Sonora. Since at the time of the analysis the information for 2005 was not
available, we used the projection of growth of the container traffic for 2005 which was about 35%
over 2004 to estimate this number of containers as 3,300 for 2005. Figure 4.2 and Figure 4.3
Figure 4.1 â€“ Maritime Routes
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 20
show the origin and destination ( in percentage) of the containerized cargo moving through the
Port of Mazatlan. The countries of origin for the containers moved through Mazatlan are shown
in Figure 4.4.
Destination of Contanarized Exports in Tons
USA, 9836,
12%
Algeria ,
14483,
17%
Spain,
27585,
32%
Italy, 6927,
8%
France,
3329, 4%
Korea,
2430, 3%
Portugal,
2618, 3%
Other,
18234,
21%
Figure 4.2 â€“ Origin of Containers
Destination of Contanarized Imports in Tons
Sinaloa,
10666,
14%
Sonora,
8640, 11%
Nuevo
Leon, 4267,
6%
Mexico
City, 1003,
1%
Other,
2216, 3%
Durango,
37897,
49%
Mexico
State,
12076,
16%
Figure 4.3 â€“ Destination of Containers
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 21
Origin of Contanarized Imports in Tons
Chile
77%
USA
6%
Spain
4%
Brazil
6%
Other
7%
Figure 4.4 â€“ International Origin of Containers
In terms of the Port of Ensenada, from our conversation with this portâ€™s personnel ( Jauregui,
2005), we estimate that the current average TEU per week moved per steam shipping company is
below 300. According to the official data provided by the SCT for 2004 ( Direccion General de
Puertos, 2005) all the containerized cargo being imported through Ensenada has as its final
destination the state of Baja California and 100% of the containerized cargo being exported from
Ensenada has its origin in the states of Baja California and Sonora. From the products listed as
exported in this data it is clear that Sonora is an important contributor to the cargo exported
through Ensenada. A rough estimate would be that at least 10% of the containers exported from
Ensenada have de State of Sonora as their origin. If we use this percentage and an approximation
of 30,000 containers exported in the year 2005, we come to an estimate of around 3,000
containers per year originating in the state of Sonora.
Also, we assumed that the minimum number of containers needed to start a scheduled container
service to Guaymas should be higher than that for Ensenada, hence the estimate of 400 TEU per
week. This would be consistent with a baseline for a regional port. From the data above we
believe that currently there are at least 160 TEU per week from Sonora that are moving through
the Ports of Mazatlan and Ensenada. This number of containers is higher than our estimate of the
average number of container per company being handled at the Port of Mazatlan for the year
2005. We anticipate that two of the goals to be recommended for the second phase of this project
include the refinement of the estimates of the TEU generated by the zone of influence of the Port
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 22
of Guaymas and discussing with the shipping lines their particular expectations and requirements
to establish a regular service to and from Guaymas.
From the perspective of the railroad analysis 400 TEU represent approximately 230 containers,
the mix of these containers would be 170 containers of 40â€™ and 60 containers of 20â€™ ( this is
equivalent to a 74- 26% container mix, or a 85- 15% TEU mix), which in turn would require a
single train with around 100 well cars to transport these containers from Guaymas ( Empalme) to
Tucson. We assumed that each car has an average length of 65â€™ so a full unit- train of 100 cars,
plus 2- 3 locomotives at around 210 feet, would have a total length of around 6,710 feet, which is
a suitable length according to the current specifications of the trains operating on the corridor.
This last result is assuming a mix of 33% single cars 33% three- car modules and 33% five- car
modules. Therefore, the proposed baseline also corresponds to what we considered an efficient
rail transportation strategy. Another observation that needs to be made is that in our proposed
analysis we assume for the different scenarios that the all containers received in Guaymas would
be exported to the United States.
We established a â€œ most likelyâ€ scenario for Guaymas, after regular service is established, as
roughly the same level as the number of containers being currently handled by the Port of
Ensenada, or 1,200 TEU per week. In this scenario the assumption is that there are several
container liners with scheduled stops at the Port of Guaymas. We believe that this scenario
would be more in line with the port of Guaymas being used as a container gateway to the United
States.
4.1 Summary of Baseline Analysis
We established a baseline for the analysis of the capacity of the corridor of 400 TEU per week. A
second expanded baseline of 1,200 TEU per week was also established. The first scenario would
represent in our estimation the most likely scenario at the start of a container service in the Port of
Guaymas. The second scenario would represent expanded containers with more than one steam
shipping line servicing the Port. These scenarios were set as a starting point to the capacity
analysis and not as a feasibility study to attract a steam shipping line to establish a regular stop in
the Port of Guaymas. Addressing this feasibility is beyond the scope of our research and is left as
a logical next step in the analysis.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 23
5 Analysis of the Port of Guaymas
Since the Port of Guaymas is an essential component of the Corridor it was the first element
analyzed. The analysis consisted of the following activities:
1. Making an inventory of the current infrastructure.
2. Determining the current and maximum capacity ( in TEU) of the infrastructure.
3. Identifying the services offered in the port.
4. Documenting the process map of the proposed container operations at the port.
5. Developing a simulation model to determine the capacity of the Port in terms of TEU.
6. Identifying the constraints of the Portâ€™s capacity.
Activities 1, 3 and 4 were accomplished through interviews with the Port personnel and other
interested parties during visits that the research team made to the Port of Guaymas. A list of the
visits and meetings is offered in Appendix G. These visits served to prepare the process maps
which are included in Appendix D. These maps were used for the different analyses reported in
this document. In this section of the report we first describe the current infrastructure of the port;
we then make general comments on this infrastructure and the baseline infrastructure used for the
analysis of the Port of Guaymas; afterwards, we broadly describe the simulation and the different
scenarios used for the simulation analysis. Finally, we present the simulation analysis and
conclude with a summary of the recommendations regarding the port infrastructure. Each one of
these activities is briefly described next.
5.1 Inventory of the Current Infrastructure
We used four different sources of information to establish the current infrastructure of the port:
direct visits to the port, information provided by the Master Plan of the Port of Guaymas ( Figure
5.1), interviews with the port personnel and information available through the web site of the port
( Administracion Portuaria Integral de Guaymas, 2005 and 2005b). We focused our attention to
the infrastructure available in the port to set up a container terminal operation.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 24
The Port of Guaymas currently has six berths in the general dock area. These positions are
depicted in Figure 5.1. The dimensions in meters of the different berths are shown in Table 5.1.
The Port has identified berths 2, 3 and 4 to start the
container operations. The Master Plan for the port
calls for consolidating berths 2, 3 and 4 into two
with a depth of 11 meters and a length of 288.5
meters each. Hence, the analysis of the capacity is
based on the existence of these two berths. This
implies dredging under berths 2 and 3 to get the
targeted depth. A question that may be asked is whether this depth is enough to allow the
operation of a container service. In order to answer this question we looked at the depth of
similar ports. In particular, we use as points of comparison the ports of Mazatlan and Ensenada.
This information was presented in Table 4.1. From this table we can see that the Port of
Guaymas has deeper docking positions than the Port of Mazatlan and it has slightly shallower
positions than the main docking position of the Port of Ensenada.
Figure 5.1â€“ Master Plan of the Port of Guaymas
Table 5.1 â€“ Berths Dimensions
Berth Length ( mts) Depth ( mts)
1 297 3
2 200 10
3 177 10
4 200 11
5 175 13
6 175 13
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 25
We also looked at the infrastructure available in a port that is serviced by the major container
shipping lines such as the ports of Manzanillo and Colombo ( Sri Lanka). Relevant information
for these ports is summarized in Table 5.2. This information was taken from the web site of the
Port of Manzanillo ( Administracion Portuaria Integral de Manzanillo, 2005) and from the
publication of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development ( Galhena, 2003):
â€œ Container Terminal Development and Management: The Sri Lanka Experience ( 1980- 2002)â€.
The information for Guaymas is based on the assumptions previously stated. The Port of
Manzanillo handled over 800,000 TEU in the year 2004 and the Port of Colombo over 1,700,000
in the year 2002.
Table 5.2 â€“ Relevant Information Summary
Description Guaymas Manzanillo Colombo
Approach Channel Depth ( mts) 12 16 15
Number Container Berths 2 2 4
Length and Depth of Berth 1 ( mts) 289, 11 250, 14 300, 12
Length and Depth of Berth 2 ( mts) 289, 11 250, 14 332, 13
Length and Depth of Berth 3 ( mts) -- -- 330, 14
Length and Depth of Berth 4 ( mts) -- -- 330, 14
Regarding the readiness of the Port of Guaymas to establish a container terminal, there are two
main differences in terms of infrastructure between the Port of Guaymas and the ports of
Ensenada and Colombo: depth of berths and navigation channels, and the availability of sea- to-shore
quay cranes. In order to see what the impact of not having a shallower berth depth in the
Port of Guaymas would be, we looked at the maximum draft ( fully loaded) information of the
ships that called on the Port of Manzanillo during the year 2005 ( up to November) and then we
compared this information with the depth available in Guaymas. In order to make this
comparison we assumed that the maximum draft that Guaymas could handle was the depth minus
one meter, or 10 meters of draft. Figure 5.3 shows the distribution of maximum draft ( fully
loaded) of the container ships ( geared with cranes) that called in the port of Manzanillo during the
first eleven months of the year 2005 ( Excel sheet with arrivals provided by Direccion General de
Puertos, 2005b). The red ( left) line represents the limit in maximum draft imposed by the depth
of the docking positions. The green ( right) line represents the limit if the docking position were
dredged to the same depth as the navigation channel. It is important to note that this limit does
not necessarily apply to every ship, only when it is fully loaded.
However, to have the flexibility and be able to grow in the future we believe that a strategic
analysis of the depth of the different navigational areas of the Port, and particularly in the
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 26
terminal area, should be performed. This is particularly true given the current trend of every
major port to dredge navigational spaces to accommodate the mega- container ships that require
depths in excess of 15 meters.
As a part of the activities related to the
inventory of the current infrastructure,
we made a physical inspection of all
the areas of the Port of Guaymas and
photographed the main working areas
of the Port. In Figure 5.2, we present
one of the proposed container yards
with some of the current container
handling equipment. In this image we
can observe one container gantry
crane and a container handling truck.
5.2 The Simulation Model
The Port of Guaymas does not currently have an operating container terminal. For this reason it
was not possible to take direct measurements to establish the capacity of the container terminal.
In order to make an estimation of this capacity we relied on simulation models that were
developed specifically to analyze the potential performance of an operating container terminal
and to assess a preliminary estimation of the capacity of the Port in terms of TEU. The models
Figure 5.2 â€“ Handling Equipment at the Port of
Guaymas
Figure 5.3 â€“ Distribution of Maximum Draft
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 27
are based on the ProModel Â® V6.0, a Montecarlo simulation package, and its aim is to obtain a
valid, logical representation of the performance of the port if container service is established.
Some of the elements built into the model include: current and predicted levels of infrastructure,
scheduled arrivals of container ships, internal operations of container terminal and rail and truck
entry and exit processes. The characteristics built into the model are in accordance with the
Master Development Plan ( Administracion Portuaria Integral de Guaymas, 2005) prepared by
the Port of Guaymas. But in order to run a more realistic simulation model, a slightly different
inventory of equipment from the one currently in place in the Port of Guaymas is necessary.
Table 5.3 presents a comparison between the current actual equipment inventory in the port and
that assumed in the main two general scenarios considered in the simulation. For a more detailed
description of the assumptions and the model, the reader is referred to Appendix I, which includes
a complete report of the simulation analysis.
Since there was no operating container terminal on the port, we designed the potential operation
of the terminal based on our review of similar ports, the UNCTAD Port Development Handbook
( UNCTAD, 1985) and on interviews with operations personnel from the Port of Guaymas. The
graphical interface of the simulation is presented in Figure 5.4, which shows the final design of
the container terminal and its different areas.
Table 5.3 â€“ Infrastructure between the Current State and the Simulated Scenarios
Description Current State Scenario 1 Scenario 2
Container Quay Cranes -- -- 2
Container Yard Crane 2 3 3
Forklifts 22 12 12
Chassis 7 12 12
Trucks 3 7 7
Container Shuttle ( Hustlers) 5 12 12
Yard Capacity in Containers -- 6552 6552
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 28
The main objective of the simulation was to estimate the current capacity, resource requirements
( cranes, trackers, forklifts) and bottlenecks. This technique allows the generation of several
scenarios with different port configurations ( resource availability and capacity, arrival and service
time policies) in order to evaluate different potential outcomes. Table 5.4 presents the different
scenarios analyzed. The first column gives the scenario number. The second column shows the
number of TEU arriving per week to the port. For this instance we used three different levels: the
baseline or 400 TEU per week; an expanded scenario of 1,200 weekly TEU; and a third scenario
of 2,000 TEU per week as the upper limit of the current capacity of the port â€“ this is roughly
175,000 TEU per year. This third scenario was set by observing the utilization of the Portâ€™s
equipment under increased demands. We believe that this capacity represents a conservative
scenario for the current conditions of the Port, which may review upwards once the exact
container terminal configuration is determined and analyzed.
The third and fourth columns give the total number of incoming and outgoing containers passing
though the port. In order to arrive at the numbers shown in this column we made assumptions of
empty containers for exportation being 70% of the loaded containers arriving to the port; and a
Figure 5.4 â€“ Screen of the Simulation Program
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 29
particular mix between two sizes of containers 40â€™ ( 74%) and 20â€™ ( 26%). The fifth and six
columns give the mix of containers ( in percentage) leaving the Port of Guaymas by truck and
train. The next column is the total number of yard cranes assumed by the simulation. In this case
we assumed three cranes for the container yard operation which is one more than what was
available when we did the infrastructure inventory of the port. Next column represents the
number of quay cranes considered in the simulation â€“ having used two levels: zero and two
cranes. The former number represents the current level and the latter represent the level we
believe will make the port feasible, in terms of ship turnaround times, for attracting shipping
lines. Gearing the Port with these cranes, however, represent the single main investment on the
Port considered in this analysis. Column nine represents the number of onboard cranes used by a
ship to load and unload containers when a quay crane is not available. Columns 10 thru 15 show
the rest of the equipment infrastructure considered in each of the scenarios. This infrastructure is
the same or slightly higher than what is currently available at the port.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 30
Table 5.4 â€“ Scenarios Analyzed for the Operation of the Port of Guaymas
Containers/ Week Ship Method
Hustler Yard Quay Ship
Cases TEU Full Empty
Truck
%
Train
% Hustler FC Crane Crane Crane Forklift Module Tug
1 400 230 168 0 100 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
2 400 230 168 100 0 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
3 400 230 168 50 50 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
4 400 230 168 30 70 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
5 400 230 168 70 30 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
6 1200 690 480 0 100 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
7 1200 690 480 100 0 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
8 1200 690 480 50 50 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
9 1200 690 480 30 70 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
10 1200 690 480 70 30 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
11 400 230 168 0 100 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
12 400 230 168 100 0 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
13 400 230 168 50 50 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
14 400 230 168 70 30 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
15 400 230 168 30 70 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
16 1200 690 480 0 100 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
17 1200 690 480 100 0 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
18 1200 690 480 50 50 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
19 1200 690 480 70 30 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
20 1200 690 480 30 70 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
21 2000 1150 800 50 50 12 8 3 0 2 12 15 2
22 2000 1150 800 50 50 12 8 3 2 0 12 15 2
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 31
The results corresponding to each of the previous scenarios are shown in Table 5.5. The first six
columns of this table give the scenario information. The column 7 gives the ship turnaround time
in hours. This is the time it takes for a ship to be serviced by the Port of Guaymas from the time
it arrives to the outside stopping buoy to the time it leaves the port. The eighth column gives the
time in hours the ship was docked in the port. Columns nine and ten represent the time a
container takes to leave the port in hours from the time it arrives to the port to the times it leaves
the port by either train or truck. The next two columns, 11 and 12: show the number of loaded
containers leaving the port by train or truck in a simulated period of two years. Column thirteen
gives the average number of containers in the container yard during the simulated period. The
fourteenth column gives the average utilization for berth three. In this case it is important to
highlight that berth four ( second container berth) was never used in the simulation. The last
column gives the maximum utilization ( in containers) of the container yard. It was assumed that
the port worked a schedule of 24 hours/ 7 days a week and it was assumed that the ships were
uniformly spaced during the week and each ship carried an average of 400 TEU. Some of the
results that can be derived from the simulation study include:
Table 5.5 â€“ Results for the Scenarios Analyzed for the Operation of the Port
Containers/ Week Ship Method
T/ A Time in Time Time # Cont # Cont # Cont Dock Max
Cases TEU Full Empty
Truck
(%)
Train
(%) Vessel Dock Rail Truck Rail Truck Yard Util Yard
1 400 230 168 0 100 27.12 25.62 32.32 -- 24112.7 -- 123.18 0.15 384
2 400 230 168 100 0 27.05 25.55 -- 11.09 -- 24109 92.52 0.15 311
3 400 230 168 50 50 27.1 25.6 30.27 11.14 11878.4 12233 106.39 0.15 314
4 400 230 168 30 70 27.05 25.56 29.03 12.04 16656.8 7429 110.91 0.15 328
5 400 230 168 70 30 27.05 25.55 37.03 11.09 7112 16987 103.42 0.15 314
6 1200 690 480 0 100 26.02 25.25 33.32 -- 71881.6 -- 192.83 0.45 391
7 1200 690 480 100 0 26.01 25.23 -- 11.09 -- 718812 99.57 0.45 315
8 1200 690 480 50 50 26.03 25.25 26.71 11.18 35579.2 36353 132.49 0.45 319
9 1200 690 480 30 70 26.02 25.25 28.43 12.58 49844 22073 152.22 0.45 337
10 1200 690 480 70 30 26.03 25.25 28.89 11.11 21327.2 50619 121.77 0.45 309
11 400 230 168 0 100 12.17 10.82 32.3 -- 24100.8 -- 125.72 0.06 466
12 400 230 168 100 0 12.16 10.8 -- 7.12 -- 24115 90.1 0.06 436
13 400 230 168 50 50 12.2 10.83 26.56 7.07 11916.8 12213 104.33 0.06 445
14 400 230 168 70 30 12.2 10.84 32.63 7.16 7150.4 16981 101.72 0.06 450
15 400 230 168 30 70 12.2 10.84 29.48 6.97 16734.4 7403 112.59 0.06 454
16 1200 690 480 0 100 11.48 10.75 31.44 -- 71856.8 -- 201.16 0.19 474
17 1200 690 480 100 0 11.46 10.73 -- 7.11 -- 71855 98.77 0.19 446
18 1200 690 480 50 50 11.48 10.74 23.94 7.07 35636.8 36296 134.35 0.19 449
19 1200 690 480 70 30 11.48 10.75 25.29 7.17 21276.8 50617 122.12 0.19 445
20 1200 690 480 30 70 11.48 10.75 27.04 6.97 49760 22187 157.2 0.19 461
21 2000 1150 800 50 50 24.3 23.7 25.1 11.23 70980 72624 160.83 0.83 311
22 2000 1150 800 50 50 10.71 10.14 23.01 7.09 71068 72628 168.89 0.35 436
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 32
1. There is a significant difference between the turnaround times for the scenarios of the
Post operating with and without quay cranes. This difference is of about 14 hours. The
average time without quay cranes is of about 26.34 hours and 11.73 for the scenarios with
quay cranes ( see Figure 5.5 and Figure 5.6). This is consistent with the turnaround time
reported by the Port of Manzanillo for similar scenarios ( See Appendix I).
2. The capacity of the container yard did not represent a constraint under the simulated
conditions. However, an assumption was made that the containers would leave the
Vessel Turnaround Time
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
Port Equipment
Avg Hours
W/ Quay Cranes
W/ O Quay Cranes
Figure 5.5 â€“ Vessel Turnaround Time
1 & 11
2 & 12
3 & 13
4 & 14
5 & 15
6 & 16
7 & 17
8 & 18
9 & 19
10 & 20
11 & 22
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
Avg Hours
Scenarios
Vessel Turnaround Time
W/ Quay Cranes W/ O Quay Cranes
Figure 5.6 â€“ Vessel Turnaround Time
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 33
container yard as soon as truck or rail transportation was available. This is consistent
with a transshipment ( or export) operation, but overly optimistic for a domestic operation.
3. Under the simulated conditions the docking facility does not seem to be a major
constraint for the capacity of the port. However, it was observed that the utilization for
one of berths, at the maximum level of demand, approached 85% when the cranes of the
ship were used to unload/ load containers. This is in contrast with the 35% reported when
quay cranes are used. Something that needs to be mentioned is that the simulation used
only one of the berths available. On the surface, this would seem to imply that the
capacity reported ( 175,000 TEU) would be obtained with only one berthing position.
However, we can not make this claim because the simulation was based on the
assumption that six ships per week would visit the port in a time- uniform basis. This is
hardly the case in real- life situation. Thus, the capacity number reported should be read as
being based on the availability of two berthing position. A higher resolution simulation
could be used to refine the capacity estimate.
4. Although the simulation was not run to the limit of the capacity of the port, we can draw
the inference that the crane ( or the lack thereof) factor was the main determinant of the
capacity of the operation of the container terminal.
5. The maximum capacity analyzed was based on similar operations. We believe that this
capacity ( around 175,000 TEU) represents a lower limit of the capacity of the port rather
than a hard upper limit. However, with the information available at the time of the study
it was the number with which we felt comfortable. A more precise study could provide a
revised capacity of the Port of Guaymas.
From the perspective of the time needed to for a container to leave the port, once it is unloaded,
we can see that the truck option is more efficient ( see Figure 5.7 and Figure 5.8). However, this
alternative could be significantly more expensive than the rail alternative.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 34
In order to verify and validate the simulation model we followed two approaches: verifying with
experts and comparing the results of the simulation with operations of similar characteristics.
After the first version of the simulation for the Port of Guaymas was finished we invited the
operations personnel of this port to review the simulation and the assumptions included in the
model. From this review the personnel from the port agreed on the general validity of the
assumptions and we made some minor adjustments to the model.
1 & 11
2 & 12
3 & 13
4 & 14
5 & 15
6 & 16
7 & 17
8 & 18
9 & 19
10 & 20
11 & 22
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
Avg Hours
Scenario
Container Time in System
W/ Quay Cranes by Truck W/ O Quay Cranes by Truck
W/ Quay Cranes by Train W/ O Quay Cranes by Train
Figure 5.7 â€“ Container Time in System
Container Time in System
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
Port Equimpent & Transportation
Avg Hours
W/ Quay Cranes by Truck
W/ O Quay Cranes by Truck
W/ Quay Cranes by Train
W/ O Quay Cranes by Train
Figure 5.8 â€“ Container Time in System
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 35
In order to further validate the simulation model we compare the performance measures given by
the simulation to data available for container operations for the Port of Manzanillo. We made the
comparison for the operations based on the turnaround times of the container ships for the cases
where the cranes of the ships were used to unload and load containers and also for the cases for
which quay cranes had been used ( See Appendix I). The results obtained supported the validity
of the simulation model. Although we believe that the current simulation model reflects the
general operation of a container terminal, we also believe that this simulation model can be
significantly improved by having access to higher- resolution operational data. For instance, some
of the parameters are based on historical averages rather than precise time distributions. The
availability of this data would render a more precise simulation model.
5.3 Summary of the Infrastructure of the Port of Guaymas
From an infrastructure perspective, we believe that the port of Guaymas, with some minor
improvements, such as the acquisition of additional container handling yard equipment, is ready
to start a container service comparable to that of the Port of Mazatlan; that is, a regional
container service.
However, the current main limitation of the port capacity is the current unavailability of quay
cranes. This precludes the Port of Guaymas from being able to offer efficient turnaround services
to the modern container ships that are not geared with their own cranes. This in turn may limit
the potential of the Port of Guaymas to serve as an efficient gateway port for container service
beyond the local region. In order to provide this service we believe that at least two quay cranes
are needed. The exact capacity and characteristics of the quay cranes and related issues, such as
the need for reinforcement of the piloting system of the port is beyond the scope of this study.
In our analysis, we have made assumptions about the type of infrastructure and level of service
needed to attract a shipping line to establish a port of call by a major container shipping line.
However, the exact needs, in terms of service and demand, should be explored with the shipping
companies. We also assumed that the operational performance of the Port and the authorities was
efficient, but this is hardly the case in the operation of other Mexican ports ( Peyrelonge et al.,
2003), so we also advise to consider additional research into the efficient operations of all the
activities involved in importing and exporting the cargo in the Port. Both of these issues are left
as future research.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 36
6 Analysis of the Mariposa Port of Entry
The main purpose of the analysis of the Mariposa Port of Entry ( POE) was to determine the
impact that the operation of a container terminal in Guaymas would have on the operations of the
port. Some of the measures of performance selected to assess this impact included: average time
of trucks to clear inspection and operational hours of Mariposa to clear the demand.
The analysis of the POE was divided into the following activities:
1. Documenting the process map of the container processing operations.
2. Developing a simulation model to estimate: capacity, bottlenecks, and cycle times.
3. Obtaining information on projected demands and flows.
4. Identifying bottlenecks in the operations.
As shown in Figure 6.1, the information obtained from the Port of Guaymas simulation model
was used as input in the Mariposa POE simulation model to obtain the desired results. A brief
description of the process map and the simulation model developed follow.
The Mariposa Port of Entry is the name given to the inspection compound which every
commercial vehicle entering the United States ( US) must go through if crossing at the city of
Nogales. When a truck enters the inspection process, it can be released automatically or
requested to go through different inspection stations before being authorized to cross from the
port to the US.
The whole system can be divided into four different sections:
1. Pre- Screening and Primary Inspection: These are the first two steps in the process and
all trucks go through them.
2. Secondary Inspection: Different tasks can be done in this section: normal secondary
inspection, 100% inspection ( unloading all the cargo), weapons and enforcement
inspection, and others.
Figure 6.1 â€“ Mariposa POE Simulation Input
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 37
3. X- Ray: There are two stations for X- Ray inspection.
4. ADOT Compound: ADOTâ€™s Motor Vehicle Division safety inspection and other
Federal inspections are conducted here.
The flow diagram in Figure 6.2 shows the logic followed by trucks in the simulation. For more
detailed information about the Mariposa POE Process see Appendix D.
While the trucks move through all the different individually required steps of the inspection
process, several institutions work together. A partial list includes:
1. Customs and Border Protection ( CBP)
2. United States Department of Agriculture ( USDA)
3. Food and Drug Administration ( FDA)
Figure 6.2 â€“ Mariposa POE Simulation Process Map
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 38
4. Arizona Department of Transportation ( ADOT)
5. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration ( FMCSA)
The physical movement of the trucks is simple and can be observed in the animation of the
simulation ( Figure 6.3 shows an image of the simulation interface and the different stations).
Currently: [ 1] trucks cross the border in two lanes, [ 2] enter one of the two pre- screening stations,
[ 3] follow to one of the four primary inspection super- booths, and then proceed to Nogales,
Arizona ( AZ) or remain in the compound for further inspection always driving in a Counter
Clock Wise ( CCW) motion around the compound [ 4, 5, 6 & 7]. These rules are adjusted as the
team at Mariposa attempts to be more efficient and to react to demand changes.
In order to determine the impact on the Mariposa POE of a container terminal in the Port of
Guaymas different scenarios were run using simulation models. After defining the different
scenarios to be analyzed and obtaining results from the Port of Guaymas simulation, the obtained
information was used to make an assessment of the Mariposa POE capacity, and the impact of the
Figure 6.3 â€“ Graphical Interface of the Simulation Program for the Mariposa POE
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 39
containerized cargo moving by highway on the POE. The information used for each scenario is
shown in Table 6.1. The first column gives the scenario number ( in accordance with the
scenarios ran in the Port of Guaymas simulation shown in Table 5.4). The second column shows
the TEU per week expected to pass through Guaymas. On the third column the number of actual
containers to be moved weekly by the Port of Guaymas is presented. In the fourth and fifth
column the distribution percentage assumed for containers being moved by truck and by rail is
shown. The sixth column shows a current high season demand assumed to analyze the different
scenarios; this number was fixed based on historic data and current demand in the port of entry.
The extra demand expected daily from the Guaymasâ€™ port operation is shown in the seventh
column and the total number of containers to cross the Mariposa POE is shown in the last
column.
The results of running the simulation of the POE in the previously described scenarios are shown
in Table 6.2. The first four columns show the scenario conditions. The sixth column shows the
Table 6.1 â€“ Information Used for Each Scenario for the Mariposa POE
Cases TEU Containers Truck Current Qty Exit Extra Rate Total
%
Rail
% Demand Port Demand ( min) Demand
Current -- -- -- -- 1300 0 0 0 1300
1 400 230 0 100 -- -- -- -- -
2 400 230 100 0 1300 230 154 3.9 1454
3 400 230 50 50 1300 108 76 7.93 1376
4 400 230 30 70 1300 72 42 14.5 1342
5 400 230 70 30 1300 50 50 5.5 1350
6 1200 690 0 100 -- -- -- -- -
7 1200 690 100 0 1300 233 154 3.9 1454
8 1200 690 50 50 1300 128 73 8.3 1373
9 1200 690 30 70 1300 74 38 16.07 1338
10 1200 690 70 30 1300 164 110 5.49 1410
11 400 230 0 100 -- -- -- -- -
12 400 230 100 0 1300 239 239 1.99 1539
13 400 230 50 50 1300 113 113 3.55 1413
14 400 230 70 30 1300 157 157 2.8 1457
15 400 230 30 70 1300 76 76 6.47 1376
16 1200 690 0 100 -- -- -- -- -
17 1200 690 100 0 1300 233 233 1.97 1533
18 1200 690 50 50 1300 112 112 3.57 1412
19 1200 690 70 30 1300 169 169 2.8 1469
20 1200 690 30 70 1300 68 68 5.85 1368
21 2000 1150 50 50 1300 105 77 7.83 1377
22 2000 1150 50 50 1300 112 112 3.82 1412
Max -- -- -- -- 2000 0 0 0 2000
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 40
expected average time in the system of each truck moving through Mariposa. In the seventh
column, the total amount of minutes required to process the demand of any given day is shown.
The extra hours required ( against the current working time) to clear the compound with the
increased activity is shown in the eighth column. The ninth column is the highest observation of
trucks in queue to enter the compound. On the tenth and eleventh columns show the bottleneck
of the system and its utilization for the simulation study. Finally, in column twelve the nominal
utilization of the POE ( total demand divided by total capacity) is estimated based on the 1,500
trucks/ day capacity stated by Mariposaâ€™s personnel.
Some of the results that can be derived from the simulation include the following:
1. The expected average time for each truck to go through the port of entry will increase
from a current 45.67 Â± 6.03 minutes delay to a 101.86 Â± 9.63 minutes expected worst
Table 6.2 â€“ Results of Running the Simulation of the POE
Cases TEU TEU
Per Year
Truck
(%)
Total
Demand
( truck)
Truck
Time
In
System
Operation
Time
( minutes)
Extra
Hours
Max in
Queue
( trucks)
Bottle-neck
Reported
Util.
POE
Util.
Current - - - 1300 45.22 764.22 1.74 163 PSA 75.69% 86.67%
1 400 20,800 0 % - - - - - - - -
2 400 20,800 100 % 1454 75.34 830.82 2.85 278 PSA 75.64% 96.93%
3 400 20,800 50 % 1376 57.97 830.45 2.84 265 PSA 73.27% 91.73%
4 400 20,800 30 % 1342 50.01 820.36 2.67 217 PSA 72.49% 89.47%
5 400 20,800 70 % 1350 61.1 808.24 2.47 202 PSA 74.69% 90.00%
6 1200 62,400 0 % - - - - - - - -
7 1200 62,400 100 % 1454 75.34 830.82 2.85 278 PSA 75.64% 96.93%
8 1200 62,400 50 % 1373 63.54 838.7 2.98 238 PSA 72.93% 91.53%
9 1200 62,400 30 % 1338 57.46 840.94 3.02 202 PSA 70.70% 89.20%
10 1200 62,400 70 % 1410 68.64 851.05 3.18 259 PSA 73.83% 94.00%
11 400 20,800 0 % - - - - - - - -
12 400 20,800 100 % 1539 101.41 897.18 3.95 401 PSA 76.65% 102.60%
13 400 20,800 50 % 1413 76.94 856.84 3.28 294 PSA 73.49% 94.20%
14 400 20,800 70 % 1457 80.91 835.51 2.93 280 PSA 78.05% 97.13%
15 400 20,800 30 % 1376 58.21 844.87 3.08 191 PSA 72.61% 91.73%
16 1200 62,400 0 % - - - - - - - -
17 1200 62,400 100 % 1533 96.14 881.52 3.69 355 PSA 76.98% 102.20%
18 1200 62,400 50 % 1412 72.13 854.13 3.24 271 PSA 73.75% 94.13%
19 1200 62,400 70 % 1469 84.8 874.52 3.58 309 PSA 74.65% 97.93%
20 1200 62,400 30 % 1368 62.83 831.53 2.86 200 PSA 73.88% 91.20%
21 2000 104,000 50 % 1377 58.44 841.42 3.02 203 PSA 73.06% 91.80%
22 2000 104,000 50 % 1412 75.06 839.8 3.00 246 PSA 76.26% 94.13%
Max - - - 2000 197.91 1,139.78 8.00 835 PSA 78.41% 133.33%
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 41
case scenario delay â€“ when 239 ( in average) containers leave the port of Guaymas in a
single day at a rate enough to reach the border the same day ( See Appendix H for details).
2. The impact of having quay cranes operating at the port of Guaymas â€“ and the increased
rate and number of trucks going to Mariposa; will impact the average waiting time per
truck from a 63.10 minutes wait to cross the border ( no quay cranes) to a 79.71 minutes
( see Figure 6.4).
3. The only case with marginal difference in inspection times was the Max scenario in
which the waiting time increased to 198.36 Â± 9.50 ( see Figure 6.5). As it was advised by
the personnel at Mariposa, demand over 1â€™ 500 trucks/ day would be considered over
capacity and have an impact in the waiting times.
Truck Time in System
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
90.00
Average Minutes
Port of Guaymas Low Efficience Port of Guaymas High Efficience
Figure 6.4 â€“ Average Truck Time in System
Current & Max
2 & 12
3 & 13
4 & 14
5 & 15
7 & 17
8 & 18
9 & 19
10 & 20
21 & 22
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Average Minutes
Trucks Time in System
Port of Guaymas Low Efficience Port of Guaymas High Efficience
Figure 6.5 â€“ Average Trucks Time in System per Scenario
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 42
4. The processing of the additional demand could require up to 2.2 additional hours of
operation of the POE personnel ( see Figure 6.6). Based on current information from
Mariposa, we know that to process a daily demand of 1,300 trucks an additional 1.5 hours
should be worked over regular schedule â€“ to finish around 8: 30 pm. We can estimate that
under current operation conditions, i. e., same facilities and personnel; it could be required
for the POE to work almost 4 extra hours ( 11 pm) to clear the demand in a worst case
scenario â€“ when 239 ( in average) containers leave the port of Guaymas in a single day at a
rate enough to reach the border the same day.
5. The bottleneck of the system is the pre- screening station and this will be the first to
require an upgrade in order to be more efficient.
In order to verify and validate the model we used some common techniques for simulation.
Information regarding the inspection process was utilized to build a logic flow. A first visit to the
POE served to collect current information on the system performance. After a preliminary model
was developed, a meeting with personnel of Custom Border Protection ( CBP) and ADOT helped
to validate the current flow of trucks in the compound. With the purpose of having accurate
results of the processing times, our staff joined CBP personnel for a validation session. The
feedback we received is included in the results of this report.
It is important to mention that our capacity analysis is based on the current infrastructure in place.
CBP is about to implement ( see letter from Donna de la Torre in Appendix J) some programs,
such as Fastlane and E- Manifest, that should have a positive impact on the currently installed
Current & Max
2 & 12
3 & 13
4 & 14
5 & 15
7 & 17
8 & 18
9 & 19
10 & 20
21 & 22
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Average Minutes
Required Operational Hours
Port of Guaymas Low Efficience Port of Guaymas High Efficience
Figure 6.6 â€“ Required Operational Hours to Clear Compound
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 43
capacity of the Mariposa Port of Entry. The exact impact of these programs is something that
should be analyzed in the future.
6.1 Summary of the Analysis
According to the analysis performed to the operation of the Mariposa POE, its current utilization
is already high ( over 85%) during the peak time of the year. This means that any additional traffic
to the port can have a significant impact on the operations of itself if it is not managed
appropriately. In our analysis we made the assumption that the hours of operation of the port
would be flexible to accommodate the additional traffic. If this is the case, the impact from the
operation of a container terminal in the Port of Guaymas goes from negligible â€“ for the most likely
scenario; to considerable when: 1) 100% of the containers from the Port of Guaymas move by
highway, 2) a demand based on the peak season of the operation of the POE is assumed, and 3)
the Port of Guaymas is operating with two quay cranes. It must be noticed that the maximum
amount of trucks that can be processed daily at Mariposa POE under current operation conditions
is around 1,500 trucks. Considering a current demand of up to 1,300 per day: it can only serve
200 trucks extra per day approximately â€“ or only 104,000 TEU ( see Table 9.3) extra per year;
without significantly affecting the waiting times currently observed. Itâ€™s fair to mention that the
results obtained are based on the assumption that the demand is that one observed during the peak
of the produce season in Mexico ( which corresponds to winter months).
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 44
7 Analysis of Highway Infrastructure Supporting the Port of Guaymas
The analysis of the highway infrastructure was divided into the following activities:
1. Identification of the main highways of the Corridor.
2. Identification of highway network in terms of links and nodes.
3. Developing the appropriate models for the analysis of the highway network.
4. Determination of current state of the highway network and the effects of added traffic
caused by the operation of a container service in the Port of Guaymas.
5. Estimation of the capacity and its utilization in each of the components of the network.
6. Identification of the bottleneck points.
In terms of highways, in the Mexican
side we focused on the Federal Highway
15, which is the main transportation link
between the Port of Guaymas and
Nogales ( Sonora) and the main
transportation link between Sonora and
Arizona ( Wilbur Smith Associates,
2001). On the US side of the border we
focused on the Highway I- 19 that
connects the City of Nogales ( AZ) with
the City of Tucson. In Figure 7.1 we
present a Geographic Information
Systems ( GIS) map that contains the
visual information of the main highways
being studied. For a detailed description
of the roads included in the study the
reader is referred to Appendix E of this
report.
As part of the analysis we divided the highway infrastructure into nodes and links ( or segments).
We defined links as segments of the highway that have similar characteristics in terms of
Figure 7.1 â€“ GIS Map of the Corridor under Study
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 45
infrastructure, such as lanes, cargo capacity, clearance, and so forth. Nodes were defined as
places where transfers between modes can occur or where the performance conditions are
different, such as in populated places, toll booths or ports of entry ( see Appendix E). The idea
behind this approach is to determine the capacity and utilization in each one of the links and
nodes in order to identify the bottleneck of the network. The cities of Tucson and Hermosillo, the
Mariposa Port of Entry in Nogales, and the Port of Guaymas were identified as the main nodes in
the highway network ( see Appendix E).
Because of their complexity, it was necessary to develop Montecarlo simulation models for the
analysis of the Port of Guaymas and the Mariposa Port of Entry. The results of these analyses are
presented in Sections 5 and 6 of this report. The capacity analysis of the rest of the links and
nodes of the highway network is presented next.
The capacity of the other nodes and links in the system was calculated analytically based on
estimates of current conditions of these nodes. For these calculations we followed the
recommendations and data provided by the Highway Performance Monitoring system ( HPMS)
( Arizona Department of Transportation ADOT, 2005a), the Highway Capacity Manual ( HCM)
( Transportation Research Board, 1994), the Multimodal Corridor and the Capacity Analysis
Manual ( MCCAM) ( Cambridge Systematics Inc., 1998). The volume and estimated capacity are
expressed in passenger cars per hour ( PCPH) and capacity utilization. The data used for the flow
( volume) of vehicles, was registered by permanent stations located at different segments of the
road. The data was obtained from official data reports from ADOT and SCT ( ADOT 2005b,
2005c and SCT 2005). The exact methodology used to arrive at the different capacity estimations
is presented in Appendix F.
The capacity for the highway segments were estimated based on the HPMS methodology, which
is a standard methodology ( ADOT, 2005a) to estimate the capacity of the highways for the State
of Arizona. The capacity results for the highway links in the State of Arizona can be observed in
Figure 7.2. Where the level of service ( LOS) is a measure of the current utilization of the
capacity of the highways ( volume/ capacity). Thus, the highways that are at capacity or near
capacity have a LOS (. 90 â€“ 1.0 utilization). This is the case for the segment of the Interstate- 19 ( I-
19) that connects with the I- 10 in the City of Tucson. This LOS indicates that at certain periods
of the day there is significant congestion on this highway, which might create delays and queues
for vehicles traveling at those periods of the day. Other than the city of Tucson, the rest of the
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 46
highway in Arizona seems to have enough capacity for the volume of vehicles they currently
handle.
The results for the Mexican highway are presented in Figure 7.3, and shows that there is not a
significant point of congestion along the Mexican highway linking Guaymas and Nogales,
Sonora. The road segment with the lowest remaining capacity and with highest utilization ( 0.28)
is located in the highway segment linking the Port of Guaymas to the town of Empalme where the
highway is reduced to a two- lane rural road. There is an alternative, more direct, route linking the
Port of Guaymas to Highway 15 that goes though the City of Guaymas. However, this route was
not considered in the analysis because we felt that this route was not likely to be used by the
container- carrying traffic from the Port of Guaymas.
LOS
( Volum e / Capac ity )
ô€‚ƒ A: ( 0.01- 0 .3)
ô€‚ƒ B: ( 0.31- 0 .5)
ô€‚ƒ C: ( 0.51- 0 .7)
ô€‚ƒ D: ( 0.71- 0 .9)
ô€‚ƒ E: ( 0.91- 1 .0)
Figure 7.2 â€“ Highway Capacity in Arizona
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 47
For the Mexican Highway, we encountered that HPMS information was not readily available, so
we had to calculate the capacity using the information provided by the Instituto Mexicano del
Transporte ( Bello et al., 2001) for the Mexican roads. We followed the same methodology used
in Arizona and we also consistently used the information provided in the Highway Capacity
Manual ( 2000). In order to obtain some of the information needed for our analysis, related to the
physical characteristics of the highway, we had to physically inspect the highway ( See for
instance Figure 7.4). For a detailed description of the methodology the reader is referred to
Appendix F.
LOS
( Volume/ Capacity)
â€¢ A: ( 0.01- 0.3)
â€¢ B: ( 0.31- 0.5)
â€¢ C: ( 0.51- 0.7)
â€¢ D: ( 0.71- 0.9)
â€¢ E: ( 0.91- 1.0)
Figure 7.3 â€“ Highway Capacity in Sonora
Figure 7.4 â€“ Mexican Highway Inspection
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 48
Another potential point of congestion is located at the City of Hermosillo along the route used by
heavy vehicles to traverse the city. This segment of the road is constrained by traffic lights and
speed bumps, increasing the utilization of this segment of the road to 0.49 ( See Table 7.1). In
order to arrive to this utilization, since no actual traffic recording for this precise route was
available, we used the maximum flow of vehicles recorded in the entry points to the city of
Hermosillo. Using this flow, and the most restrictive segment along this urban route ( two lanes
with speed bumps), we obtained an estimate of the capacity of this segment of the highway
network. As it turned out, there are only two other more restrictive segments along the entire
highway network analyzed: just north of Mariposa POE and the entrance to the city of Tucson,
both the in the US side of the border.
Other nodes of the highway network that can potentially be the bottleneck of the network is at
Benjamin Hill, Sonora. In this point there is a military checkpoint in which all the busses and
trucks going thorough it are inspected. Since we did not have access to direct data on traffic or
inspection times at this facility we collected anecdotal data from interviews with trucking
companies that use the Corridor, among them Transportes Pitic, which is a trucking company
based in Sonora ( Cons, 2005). According to these interviews we estimate an average wait in this
checkpoint of one hour. However, we have received anecdotal information that this time can
increase to up to 3.5 hours in the high season according to data collected by SCT ( Armenta,
2005). Table 7.1 summarizes our findings related to highway capacity and utilization. A
detailed discussion on how the results in this table were obtained is presented in Appendix F.
Table 7.1 â€“ Capacity Estimates for the different nodes in PCPH
Node Lanes Volume/ Hour Capacity/ Hour LOS
Guaymas 2 268.15 1180.33 0.23
Toll 1 3 140.00 1050.00 0.13
Hermosillo 2 556.05 1142.86 0.49
Toll 2 3 356.27 1050.00 0.34
Benjamin Hill 2 226.17 702.00 0.32
Santa Ana 2 173.71 1152.00 0.15
Toll 3 3 224.00 1050.00 0.21
Imuris 2 224.16 1152.00 0.19
Toll 4 3 294.00 1050.00 0.28
Nogales, AZ 2 872.00 1672.00 0.52
Tucson 2 4314.00 4271.00 1.01
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 49
7.1 Summary of Highway Capacity
From the information collected at the different traffic stations located in Mexico and the US, we
were able to calculate the critical flow per hour at different segments of the highways. With this
data and the information collected about the physical infrastructure of the highways, we were able
to estimate the current capacity and utilization of the corridor highways. The results obtained are
presented in Figure 7.2 and Figure 7.3 and summarized in Table 7.1.
These results show that currently the highways from Guaymas to Tucson seem to have enough
capacity to handle additional traffic. Since the operation of the container terminal will only
increment a fraction of at most 1- 2 percent ( e. g. from .20 to .22) of the current level of demand,
as it will be explained in Section 9, we expect that the operation of a container terminal in the
Port of Guaymas would not affect the current highway utilization in a significant way. The impact
of the operation of the Port of Guaymas on the Mariposa Port of Entry was previously analyzed in
Section 6.
Two points of concern are the City of Tucson and the checkpoint station at Benjamin Hill. The
highway segment connecting the Interstate Highway I- 19 to Interstate I- 10 presents high levels of
utilization. However, we believe that this corresponds to the rush hour of the City of Tucson, and
the utilization of this highway segment for the rest of the day is significantly lower. Regarding
Benjamin Hill our concern lies on the lack of hard data to support our capacity estimates. We feel
that this facility should be studied in further detail to provide a better characterization of its
current capacity utilization.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 50
8 Analysis of Railroad Infrastructure Supporting the Port
The analysis of the railroad infrastructure was divided into the following activities:
1. Gathering information about the current railroad infrastructure from ADOT, UP and
Ferromex.
2. Identify the main ( modal interchange) nodes in the system.
3. Developing the appropriate models for the analysis of the railroad network.
4. Determination of current state of the railroad network and the effects of added traffic
caused by the operation of a container service in the Port of Guaymas.
5. Estimation of the capacity and its utilization in each of the components of the railroad
network.
6. Identification of the bottleneck points.
The second major transportation mode researched are the railroad linking Guaymas to Nogales,
Sonora and Nogales to Tucson, Arizona. These railroad segments are owned by private
companies. The segment between Guaymas and Nogales is owned by Ferromex and the line from
Nogales ( AZ) to Tucson is owned by Union Pacific. Union Pacific also owns the main line from
Tucson to El Paso, Texas and from Tucson to Yuma, Arizona. Although for all practical purposes
these are separate companies, Union Pacific has a stake in Ferromex, so there is some potential
for coordination between the two companies. A combined network is presented in Figure 7.1, and
a detailed description of the railroad line is presented in Appendix E.
For the railroad, the main nodes identified are the intermodal and inspection terminals in the Port
of Guaymas, the Port of Tucson and the DeConcini port of entry/ Rio Rico ( which are considered
as a single node for the purpose of this analysis). For these facilities ( with the exception of the
Port of Guaymas) we use a rough estimate of their capacity based on standard capacity
calculations for railroads. There are also other nodes in the system where the trains are
processed; these include the switching yards of Empalme, Nogales and Tucson. In the case of the
railroads the military inspection of the cargo does not occur at Benjamin Hill, but at the station of
Empalme according to UP and Ferromex personnel. The inspection at Empalme lasts around 2- 3
hours per train and takes place before the cars leave the terminal of Empalme. Military personnel
inspect the cars while the trains are being formed at Empalme. This operation is similar to the
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 51
inspection operation of the trains performed by US Customs at Rio Rico, in the sense that there
are some cars that US Customs personnel request to be set aside for further inspections.
In order to estimate the capacity of the different components of the railroad network we used the
guidelines set forth in the study Parametric Analysis of Railway Line Capacity ( Federal Railroad
Administration, 1975), which provides a rough estimate of the capacity of uniform line segments
between rail stations. The main information that we used for our calculations included the
average speed of the trains on each particular segment, the average space between sidings, and
the type of control used to coordinate the trains. For the partition of the line segments we used the
main railroad stations, which resulted in a line segment between Nogales and Tucson, a second
one between Empalme and Hermosillo a third one between Hermosillo and Benjamin Hill and the
last one between Benjamin Hill and Nogales.
The information gathered to calculate the capacity of the railroad corresponding to Ferromex was
documented through interviews with the key Ferromex personnel involved in the operations. In
Appendix F we include some of the data provided by Ferromex. Figure 8.1, shows the capacity
and the utilization of the railway in the Ferromex part of the Corridor. In this figure the capacity
is given in trains per day and the utilization is given as a fraction of the total capacity available. In
Table 8.1 we present the results of capacity estimation for the whole Corridor. The first column
identifies each of the railroad segments in which we divided the Corridor; the second column
presents the average allowable speed for each of the segments. The third, fourth and fifth columns
shows the assumptions about block signals, length of segment and average distance between
sidings for each segment ( please refer to Appendix F). Finally columns sixth presents the
calculated capacity of the railroad ( in trains per day) and column seventh shows the current flow
through the railroad, and the last column is the current utilization of the capacity.
Figure 8.1 â€“ Utilization of the Ferromexâ€™s Tracks
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 52
As shown in Table 8.1, the capacity of the line with the current infrastructure in place can support
up to 14 trains per day in both directions. The utilization of the track was calculated based in the
current daily schedule ( 6 trains per day) for the Empalme- Benjamin Hill line and the Benjamin
Hill- Nogales line ( 6 daily trains). Thus, the highest utilization of the railroad in the Mexican side
of the railroad is in the segment between Benjamin Hill and Nogales. These segments have a
capacity of up to 13 trains per day and receive an average of 6 trains per day, then using 44% of
their current capacity.
For the UP line from Nogales to Tucson, we used the same type of information, but this time we
obtained the data that is publicly available through ADOT and the Federal Railroad
Administration ( Federal Railroad Administration, 2005), which include data on crossings and
demand. Using the same methodology that it was used to calculate the capacity for the Mexican
side of the railroad we calculated the current utilization of the railway between Nogales and
Tucson ( Figure 8.2). We obtained a rough estimation that 31% of the capacity of the line is
currently being used, assuming that the current demand is at five trains per day, although there are
reasons to believe that this level is already at six trains per day.
In order to validate our findings we presented the results of the capacity analysis to Joaquin Rojo
de la Vega, Ferromex Vice- president for the Northwest region and Bob Naro, Vice- president of
Mexico Operations of UP, during a meeting on January 5, 2006 at Tucson. While both Mr. Rojo
De la Vega and Mr. Naro in general agreed with the results presented we did not obtained a
formal technical endorsement of our findings. However, we have had additional interactions with
Ferromex personnel that served as the basis for our analysis.
Table 8.1 â€“ Capacity Estimates for Different Segments of the Railroad ( Trains per Day)
Segment Speed Block Sidings Length Capacity Volume Utilization
Enpalme- Hermosillo 43 1 45 87 14 6 42%
Hermosillo- B. H. 46 1 37 78 17 6 35%
B. H.- Nogales 38 1 44 90 14 6 44%
Nogales- Tucson 35 1 29 65 19 6 31%
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 53
The main result from the analysis of both railways is that there is still enough capacity to grow in
terms of trains per day, but we did not estimate the capacity at the main switching yards in
Empalme and Tucson. However, Ferromex personnel assured us that there was enough capacity
to support the container activities of the Port of Guaymas. We have reasons to believe that one of
the main congestion points in the binational railway corridor could be the switching yard at
Tucson, this notion was ratified after meeting with Bob Naro, however he did not express a
concern over this issue since apparently UP is already adressing this issue. Even if the numbers in
Table 8.1 change when the Ford plant in Hermosillo, Sonora is fully operational; the total
requirements from the Port of Guaymas would be two additional trains, one each way, to handle
all the different scenarios we mentioned in Section 5.
According to UP the main restriction for the operations of railroad service between Nogales and
Tucson is the operational schedule of the customs officers at the DeConcini Port of Entry and at
the site in Rio Rico ( Figure 8.3 and Figure 8.4). According to UP these inspections require
around 2- 3 hours per train. The inspection time at Rio Rico, coupled with the operating time at
the DeConcini POE ( approximately 10 hours) would reduce the amount of northbound trains to
around 3- 4 trains per day, and the same would apply for southbound trains, bringing the
maximum capacity at around eight trains per day, which is significantly less than the physical
capacity. Our estimation of the current railroad capacity is consistent with the information
provided by CBP field personnel and later corroborated by DHS personnel ( see letter in Appendix
J). However, DHS staff disputes the claim that the CBP inspections are the cause of the reduction
Figure 8.2 â€“ Utilization of UPâ€™s Tracks
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 54
of rail capacity. In a letter from Donna de la Torre, Director of Field Operations, Bureau of
Customs and Border Protection; received on April 25 of this year ( see Appendix J for a copy of
the letter), she seems to indicate that the main factors affecting the delays of the trains at the
border are the required train break check procedures, the lack of punctuality of the northbound
trains of crossing the border and the crew change that takes place at the border. Since we did not
have access to the inspection facilities, we were not able to assess the particular factors affecting
the delays. However, while not part of the scope of work of the project being reported, we
believe that a closer analysis of the railroad processing procedures is needed in order to establish
procedural and infrastructural improvements. This is left as a recommendation for further
investigation
Another issue raised by Union Pacific during the meeting was the lack of equipment in Rio Rico
to meet the inspection requirements of US customs for a double- stacked container train. For
instance, if US Customs personnel needed to inspect the contents of a container located in the
bottom of a double- stacked platform the top container would have to be lifted to allow the access
to the container at the bottom. This would considerably delay the inspection of the train, if not
making the inspection impossible because currently there is no container crane available to make
this maneuver possible. A potential way to make this inspection operation more efficient would
be to disengage the platform at the Rio Rico and allow the train to continue on to Tucson.
However, this is not feasible because the Rio Rico siding is not designed to serve as a switching
yard, for a detailed description of the operating procedure at DeConcini and Rio Rico facilities,
read Appendix D. A better alternative, that we recommend be explored in the future, is to
perform the inspection operation at Tucson. From the letter from Donna de la Torre, mentioned
above, it seems that CBP is willing to further discuss this option. This is left for further analysis.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 55
Figure 8.3 â€“ Northbound Rail Crossings at the Border ( Provided by Ferromex, 2005)
Figure 8.4 â€“ Southbound Rail Crossings at the Border ( Provided by Ferromex, 2005)
We also researched the railway in terms of existing and necessary weight and clearance capacity
to handle double stacked trains from the Port of Guaymas to the city of Tucson. From empirical
data, of the cars transported from the Ford plant in Hermosillo to Tucson, we know that currently
there is enough clearance to handle double stacked containers from Hermosillo to Tucson. Thus,
we just needed to document the segment Guaymas- Hermosillo to complete this part of the study.
We performed a physical inspection of the railroad from Hermosillo to Guaymas, documenting
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 56
the overpasses and the clearance limitations. The resulting information is shown in Table 8.2,
Table 8.3 and Figure 8.5. After getting the specifications and physically inspecting the overpasses
for the Guaymas- Nogales railway and the physical inspection of the line we could not find any
major restriction to the operation of double stacked container trains for the Guaymas- Nogales
segment.
The previous capacity analysis is based on the assumption that both companies, Ferromex and
UP, have enough equipment, i. e., engines, container platforms, etc, to make an efficient use of the
currently installed physical rail infrastructure.
A final note is regarding the effect of the additional trains on the cities of Nogales, Arizona and
Nogales, Sonora. While we did not perform a specific analysis in this regard, we made the
assumption that the additional train will have to observe the current Uniform Vehicle Code
( Federal Railroad Administration, 2006) related to not block an urban intersection for more than 5
minutes continuously. Being this the case, we believe that the marginal impact to Nogales,
Arizona should be minimal. However, a more detailed analysis could be undertaken to determine
the specific impact to Nogales, Arizona. The same conclusion could be applied to Nogales,
Sonora with one additional comment: Nogales, Sonora is also impacted by the trainâ€™s traverse by
the City. We assume that the wait of the train to cross to the US side of the border is efficient and
expedient. A more detailed analysis of the crossing operation could be performed to verify this
assumption.
Figure 8.5 - Overpasses in the Railway Guaymas- Hermosillo
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 57
8.1 Summary of Railroad Capacity Analysis
From the information gathered by interviews with Ferromex and UP and the public information
available at ADOT and the Federal Railroad Administration ( FRA), we calculated the capacity of
rail segments along the corridor and the current level of utilization of the line. The results of
obtained are presented in Figure 8.1 and Figure 8.2.
The current capacity of the railroadâ€™s physical infrastructure seems adequate to handle the service
demand imposed by the different scenarios analyzed for the operations of the Port and the
Corridor. However, this capacity seems to be restricted by the current inspection procedures and
railroad operations at the City of Nogales, AZ.
Table 8.2 â€“ Specifications for Overpasses
p p
SUBDIRECCIÃ“N DE OPERACIÃ“N
DIVISIÃ“N HERMOSILLO
GALIBOS EN EL TRAMO DE NOGALES A EMPALME, SONORA.
ALTURA DEL
HONGO DE RIEL
PUERTA DE INSPECCIÃ“N ADUANAL Km. T- 4+ 190 4.36 T ESTRUCTURA METALICA INSP. UNID.
PASO INFERIOR ENCINAS km. T- 9+ 650 8.10 6.85 T CRUCE CARRETERO
PASO INFERIOR ENCINAS Km. T- 9+ 700 8.10 6.85 T CRUCE CARRETERO
PASO INFERIOR Km. T- 150+ 033 32.00 8.40 T CRUCE PEATONAL
PASO INFERIOR PTO. GONZALITOS Km. T- 153+ 910 8.10 6.85 T CRUCE CARRETERO
PASO INFERIOR PTO. GONZALITOS Km. T- 153+ 960 8.10 7.20 T CRUCE CARRETERO
PUENTE RIO SONORA Km. T- 279+ 720 4.58 7.16 T ESTRUCTURA METALICA PASO INFERIOR
PASO INFERIOR Km. T- 409+ 937 15.60 7.54 T CRUCE CARRETERO
PASO INFERIOR Km. T- 416+ 094 23.63 7.42 T CRUCE PEATONAL
PASO INFERIOR Km. T- 422+ 300 18.00 8.60 T CRUCE CARRETERO
NOMBRE UBICACIÃ“N ANCHO LINEA OBSERVACIONES
Table 8.3 â€“ Translation of the Specifications for the Overpasses ( in feet)
Name Location Width Height Line Observations
Customs inspection Km T- 4+ 190 14.30 22.46 T Metallic structure for inspection unit
Overpass at Encinas Km T- 9+ 650 26.56 22.46 T Road crossing
Overpass at Encinas Km T- 9+ 700 59.04 22.46 T Road crossing
Overpass Km T- 50+ 033 26.56 27.55 T Pedestrian crossing
Overpass at Gonzalitos Km T- 153+ 910 104.96 22.46 T Road crossing
Overpass at Gonzalitos Km T- 153+ 960 26.56 23.61 T Road crossing
Bridge Rio Sonora Km T- 279+ 720 26.56 23.48 T Metallic structure over the bridge
Overpass Km T- 409+ 937 15.02 24.73 T Road crossing
Overpass Km T- 416+ 094 51.16 24.33 T Pedestrian crossing
Overpass Km T- 422+ 300 77.50 28.20 T Road crossing
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 58
9 Overall Corridor Analysis
The purpose of this part of the analysis is to unify the findings from the analysis of different
components of the corridor, identifying the current and potential bottlenecks for the flow of
containers from the Port of Guaymas to Tucson. At the end of this section we address some
operational and commercial issues that emanated in the course of the study, either from the
meetings we had with the different stakeholders or from information we researched.
The overall corridor analysis was divided into the following activities:
1. Identification of the most critical points, or potential bottlenecks documented in previous
studies.
2. Determination of the different scenarios for the analysis of the Corridor:
a. Current situation ( no containers moving through Guaymas).
b. Baseline for the initial operation of the Port of Guaymas.
c. Baseline with a moderate increase in the number of containers moving through
Guaymas.
3. Determination of performance measures for the analysis of the corridor.
4. Determination of the capacity and utilization of the Corridor capacity for the different
scenarios.
5. Identification of the bottlenecks for the different scenarios.
6. Proposing some potential solutions aimed at improving the overall performance of the
Corridor.
7. Analysis of complementary operational and commercial factors of the Corridor.
For the purposes of this study, we defined the logistical corridor between Guaymas and Tucson as
a Railroad and Highway corridor with multimodal connections at the Port of Guaymas and the
Port of Tucson. The first activity for this study was to identify the infrastructure currently in
place for highways, railroads and multimodal terminals.
As part of the analysis we divided the infrastructure of railroads and highways into nodes and
links. We defined links as segments of the road or railroad that have similar characteristics in
terms of infrastructure, such as lanes, cargo capacity, clearance, and so forth. Nodes were defined
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 59
as places where transfers between modes can occur or where the performance conditions are
different, such as in populated places, toll booths or ports of entry ( see Appendix E). These nodes
are primarily analyzed individually in this study.
For the overall evaluation of the corridor with the selected performance measures, we analyzed
several scenarios that are consistent across the simulations in the Mariposa POE and the Port of
Guaymas. The scenarios we explored were:
â€¢ Current conditions without container terminal in Guaymas.
â€¢ Container terminal running at the minimum required level ( 400 TEU).
o 100 % Trucks from the port
o 100 % Train from the port
o 50% Trucks and 50% Train
o 70% Trucks and 30% Train
o 30% Trucks and 70% Train
â€¢ Container terminal running at the medium level ( 1,200 TEU).
o 100 % Trucks
o 100 % Train
o 50% Trucks and 50% Train
o 70% Trucks and 30% Train
o 30% Trucks and 70% Train
â€¢ Finally with 2000 loaded TEU per week.
o 50% Trucks and 50% Trains
The capacity estimates for these scenarios are presented next.
9.1 Current Capacity and Utilization of the Corridor
As part of the activities of the study we estimated the current capacity and the utilization for the
main nodes and links for the railroads and the highways of the Corridor. The current capacities
and utilization the railroads and highways are documented in Table 9.1 and Table 9.2
respectively. These tables show that with the exception of the intersection of the highways I- 19
and I- 10 in the City of Tucson, the rest of the elements of the corridor seem to have enough
capacity for additional traffic. We believe that the lack of capacity exhibited by the I- 19 and I- 10
intersection is a transient occurrence only observed at the peak hour of the morning and afternoon
commute. Thus, we did not consider this intersection to be a bottleneck for the corridor.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 60
However, a more detailed analysis should be undertaken to determine the exact effect of
additional traffic in this segment of the highway.
Table 9.3 presents the information related to the current capacity and utilization nodes that were
not included in the previous tables. From the utilization reported in this table, and as it was
mentioned in Sections 7 and 8, the current main bottlenecks of the corridor appear to be the
inspection points at the border. Both transportation modes, rail and trucking, have their main
restrictions when crossing northbound to the US. In the case of trucks, from information provided
by CBP personnel and the simulation model, we have estimated the maximum number of trucks
that can be processed daily at Mariposa POE which under current operational schedules is around
1,500 trucks. Since, we also know that the current daily demand at the annual peak season is of
about 1,300 trucks, the most additional traffic that can be handled without significantly modifying
the current operational schedule is of about 200 trucks per day or only 104,000 TEU per year.
Also, due to inspection time requirements and railroad operations in Nogales ( see Section 8),
currently only up to 8 trains per day can cross the border, which means only one additional
northbound train per day can send through the corridor. This additional train corresponds to a
total of 120,000 TEU per year ( Table 9.3).
Table 9.1 â€“ Estimation of Capacity and Utilization of Railroads
Segment Speed Block Sidings Length Capacity Volume Utilization
Empalme- Hermosillo 43 1 45 87 14 6 42%
Hermosillo- B. H. 46 1 37 78 18 6 34%
B. H.- Nogales 38 1 44 90 14 6 44%
Nogales- Tucson 35 1 29 65 19 6 31%
Table 9.2 â€“ Estimation of Capacity and Utilization of Highways
Node Lanes Volume/ Hr Capacity Utilization
Guaymas 2 268.15 1180.33 23%
Toll 1 3 140.00 1050.00 13%
Hermosillo3 2 556.05 1142.86 49%
Toll 2 3 356.27 1050.00 34%
Benjamin Hill 2 226.17 702.00 32%
Santa Ana 2 173.71 1152.00 15%
Toll 3 3 224.00 1050.00 21%
Imuris 2 224.16 1152.00 19%
Toll 4 3 294.00 1050.00 28%
Nogales, AZ 3 872.00 1672.00 52%
Tucson 2 4283.00 4271.00 100%
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 61
The main intermodal nodes in the corridor are located in Guaymas, Hermosillo and Tucson. The
container capacity of the Port of Guaymas has already been estimated at more than 175,000 TEU
per year ( according to our simulation results) and the capacity of the Port of Tucson is at 295,000
TEU per year ( Levin, 2005). We do not have an estimate for the intermodal terminal in
Hermosillo, but since it is not economically viable to load containers in trains of cargo bound for
the Port of Guaymas or unload trains coming from Guaymas, then it is not a feasible alternative
for the corridor.
From Tables 9.1 to 9.3 we can see that the current bottlenecks of the Guaymas- Tucson corridor
correspond to the Mariposa POE, followed by the DeConcini POE/ Rio Rico and the Port of
Guaymas. We estimate the current capacity of the corridor is 175,000 TEU if both ports of entry
are operational and a railroad container service between Guaymas and Tucson is available.
However, this capacity is reduced to 104,000 TEU per year if the railroad service is not available.
On the other hand, the current capacity for the corridor would be of 120,000 TEU per year, if
only train is used to move the containers from Guaymas to Tucson. In this case, the main factor
limiting the capacity of the Corridor would be the train procedures performed at the DeConcini
Port of Entry and/ or Rio Rico facilities.
An overall summary of the Corridor capacity is offered in Table 9.4. The capacities for the
highways are given in trucks per day, which is obtained by assuming that every truck is
equivalent 1.5 passenger vehicles. For the case of the railroad the capacities are given in
containers per day, which is calculated based on the assumption of 100 cars per train with four
TEUs per car. To determine the capacity of the overall corridor we assumed an operation of the
highways and terminals of 12 hours per day, which are the hours of operation at the Mariposa
POE at maximum capacity ( From 8: 00 AM â€“ 8: 00PM). Thus, the Port of Guaymas can process
50 containers ( trucks) per hour which would be equivalent to 600 Containers per day for imports.
Table 9.3 â€“ Estimation of Capacity and Utilization of Highways
Mariposa Guaymas Port of Tucson Nogales
Capacity 1,500 600 640 400
TEU 3,000 1,020 1,114 1,600
Days 260 172 300 300
Cap TEU 780,000 175,440 334,000 480,000
Current 676,000 0 30,000 360,000
Available 104,000 175,440 304,000 120,000
Utilization 87% 0% 9% 75%
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 62
If the reader needs to reconcile these numbers to TEU, the ratio of TEU to container is 1.74, using
a mix of 20â€™ and 40â€™ containers of 26- 74% respectively.
From the previous discussion, from a physical infrastructure perspective, we believe that the
current capacity of the Guaymas- Tucson is 175,000 TEU per year if both rail and truck service to
move containers between Guaymas and Tucson are available. Thus, we believe the current
unavailability of efficient rail service to move containers between Guaymas and Tucson is a very
important limiting factor for the operation of the Corridor.
9.2 Utilization of the Corridor with a Terminal Container at Guaymas
In this sub- section we perform an abbreviated sensitivity analysis to revise our estimates of
capacity for the different elements of the Corridor to reflect the operation of a container terminal
in the Port of Guaymas. We used the output from the simulation of the Port of Guaymas as input
for the rest of the corridor, with a similar procedure as we did with the simulation for the
Mariposa POE. For example in one of the scenarios the demand for the highway would be
increased by 239 containers per day, which adds 239 more trucks to the current average daily
flow of the Corridor. For the case of the trains we estimated that one additional train in both
directions ( northbound and southbound) should be more than enough for handling all the
Table 9.4 â€“ Current and Available Daily Capacity of the Overall Corridor
Corridor
Components
Higway Capacity Used Available Railroad Capacity Used Available Capacity Used Available
Links Links
Guay- Empalme 9,664 3,157 6,507 Guay- Empalme 1400 200 1200 11,064 3,357 7,707
Empalme- Her 26,650 3,142 23,508 Empalme- Her 1400 600 800 28,050 3,742 24,308
Her- B. H. 22,204 5,026 17,178 Her- B. H. 1600 600 1000 23,804 5,626 18,178
B. H.- Imuris 26,057 2,034 24,023 B. H.- Nog 1400 600 800 27,457 2,634 24,823
Imuris- Nog 17,818 2,322 15,496 17,818 2,322 15,496
Nog- Mariposa 28,082 3,524 24,558 28,082 3,524 24,558
Mariposa- I19 32,464 13,828 18,636 32,464 13,828 18,636
I19- Tucson 30,464 26,092 4,372 Nog- Tucson 1800 600 1200 32,264 26,692 5,572
Nodes Nodes
Guaymas Port* 600 0 600 Guaymas Port 0 0 600 0 600
Hermosillo 9,143 5,004 4,139 9,143 5,004 4,139
Guaymas 9,440 2,358 7,082 9,440 2,358 7,082
Santa Ana 9,216 1,566 7,650 9,216 1,566 7,650
Mariposa 1,500 1,296 204 Nogales, AZ 800 600 200 2,300 1,896 404
Nogales, AZ 13,376 7,429 5,947 13,376 7,429 5,947
Port of Tucson 640 100 540 640 100 540
Tucson** 34,168 35,635 0 34,168 35,635 0
Total 1,500 1,296 204 800 600 200 2,300 1,896 404
Modal Capacity Modal Capacity Overall Corridor
* Assuming a terminal with two quay cranes in Guaymas.
+ We assume also 12 hours to convert to a capacity per day.
+ With 100 cars per train and 2 Containers ( 40') per car.
** Capacity estimation at peak hour, since is a transient occurrence, we do not consider this a hard bottleneck.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 63
containers coming in and out of the port for all the different scenarios ( Table 9.5). Another
motivation for programming a daily train is to reduce the waiting time for containers leaving the
port by rail. However, we need to mention that the addition of one train in each direction would
represent a worse case scenario in terms of the rail capacity needed.
With the additional demand, the effects on the highways are between 1- 2% of increase in the
utilization ( volume/ capacity) of the different segments ( Table 9.6). Thus, we conclude that given
this minor increase, the operation of the port at the levels selected in the simulation would not
significantly impact the highways. The main constraints for the highways are the inspection
points at Benjamin Hill and the Mariposa POE. From the results of the simulation the nominal
utilization for the Mariposa POE would increase to over 100% ( see Table 6.2). In theory, this is
not possible. However, our assumption is that this over utilization would be addressed by
increasing the operating hours of the POE, as it is currently done to process the produce at the
peak of the harvesting season. We estimate that the additional time to process the added traffic
would be of around two hours. These estimations are based on the results provided by the
simulation model which was built on data provided by CBP personnel. We recommend that a
more detailed analysis of Mariposa POE is undertaken to verify our findings and to analyze
improvements.
Table 9.5 â€“ Capacity and Utilization with a Container Terminal in Guaymas
Segment Speed Block Sidings Length Capacity Volume Utilization
Empalme- Hermosillo 43 1 45 87 14 8 56%
Hermosillo- B. H. 46 1 37 78 18 8 46%
B. H.- Nogales 38 1 44 90 14 8 58%
Nogales- Tucson 35 1 29 65 19 8 42%
Table 9.6 â€“ Capacity and Utilization with Terminal in Guaymas
Node Lanes Volume/ Hr Capacity Utilization
Guaymas 2 280.72 1180.33 24%
Toll 1 3 140.00 1050.00 13%
Hermosillo3 2 567.10 1142.86 49%
Toll 2 3 366.02 1050.00 35%
Benjamin Hill 2 238.49 702.00 34%
Santa Ana 2 182.78 1152.00 15%
Toll 3 3 234.17 1050.00 22%
Imuris 2 234.17 1152.00 19%
Toll 4 3 308.50 1050.00 29%
Nogales, AZ 3 889.85 1672.00 53%
Tucson 2 4298.00 4271.00 101%
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 64
For the case of the railroad, the increased demand would require two more trains going through
the corridor, one going south from Tucson to Guaymas and one going north from Guaymas to
Tucson. This flow would generate a utilization ( volume/ capacity) of the physical capacity of the
railroad of up to 58 %, and a full utilization of the railroad facilities at Nogales, AZ ( DeConcini
and Rio Rico). For this mode of transportation would be a substantial change from the current
levels, however in terms of physical capacity this number would still be manageable..
Another analysis consisted on determining the Average Travel Time ( ATT). The ATT was
calculated according to the data provided by several carriers and shippers that currently use the
corridor ( Table 9.7), to this time we added the waiting time at the border ( Cano, 2005; Roy, 2005;
Maldonado, 2005). The traveling time in the table assumes a waiting time of one hour at
Benjamin Hill, which is the normal waiting time during off- peak season, however this estimate
may be revised in the future since we have information that this time can be up to 3.5 hours in the
peak season.
The estimated travel time by highway is based on average travel speeds provided by interviewed
companies and by the maximum allowed speeds in different roads in the US and Mexico. We also
included inspection times in Mexico and at the border. The summary of these results is presented
in Table 9.7.
In the case of the railroad, the travel time was calculated based on historical information for the
year 2005 provided by Ferromex ( Ferromex, 2006). For the UP line we estimated the time with
the reported travel speeds, schedules and waiting time at the border ( UP, 2006; Association of
American Railroads, 2006). One limitation of this approach is that we are not taking into account
the waiting time of trains at the UP stations, since we did not have actual the performance reports
of the trains in these routes, so the traveling time of the railroad in the US might be
underestimated. However, for the Mexican railroad we have historical reports provided by
Ferromex, and their performance of trains traveling from Empalme to Nogales takes an average
Table 9.7 â€“ Average Transit Times by Truck
Travel Time ( Hours)
Highway Hermosillo Nogales Tucson Phoenix El Paso Chicago
Guaymas 2 6* 9** 11 14 35
Hermosillo 0 4.5 7** 9 12 33
Tucson 6 1 0 2 5 26
Long Beach 7 8 7 5.5 12 30
* Assuming an average of one hour of inspection at Benjamin Hill.
** Assuming one hour of waiting time at the border.
Logistics Capacity Study of the Guaymas- Tucson Corridor 65
of 14 hours with a standard deviation of around 2 hours. The summary of the travel information
without is presented on Table 9.8.
We added the waiting time of the containers at the port to the regular traveling speed to get an
estimate of the time it takes for a container to travel all the way to Tucson once it has arrived at
the Port of Guaymas.
9.3 Complementary Analysis
Since currently there is not a container service between Guaymas and Tucson and it is not clear if
and when this service will be offered we did a very preliminary analysis of the current cost of
transportation of containers from the Port of Guaymas to Tucson and Phoenix.
Since currently there are no railroad services to transport containers from the Port of Guaymas to
Tucson we wanted to investigate the commercial feasibility of using truck instead. In order to
pursue this goal, we obtained cost information from two different trucking companies for
transporting a 40â€™ container from the Port of Guaymas to Tucson and Phoenix. The prices that we
obtained from these companies were of around $ 1,300 to move a container from Guaymas to
T